Opinion ID: 2198338
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Sufficiency of Evidence for Conviction

Text: The defendant claims that the State's evidence supporting his murder conviction is inherently incredible and therefore insufficient to support the verdict. First, he claims that the State purchased, through generous plea agreements, the testimony of the other participants in the crime, David and Wesley Young. The defendant also argues that witness Clea Collins cannot be believed because of inconsistencies in his testimony as to whether he provided information to Crime Stoppers, a joint media-law enforcement effort to gather information regarding unsolved crimes. The testimony of Mark White is likewise incredible, he claims, because the State paid him an additional one hundred dollars after he testified. This Court will reverse a jury verdict where the evidence supporting the verdict is so incredible as to be beyond belief or is without probative value. Maynard v. State (1987), Ind., 513 N.E.2d 641, 644-45. Where the evidence is not inherently incredible, the jury determines witness credibility. Id. at 644. We find that the questioned evidence was not inherently incredible and therefore reject the defendant's contention that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for murder.