Court Opinion

ID: 9740028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:26:00.124135+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:15.559814
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion setting aside the murder conviction and ordering judgment entered imposing a sentence for involuntary manslaughter.
The evidence in this case correctly recit ed by the majority opinion is that appellant approached the victim from the rear while she was speaking with a child and struck her so forcefully that a vertebral artery was severed. The jury was fully and correctly instructed as to what they must find to constitute murder.
Although appellant did not use a weapon and struck but a single blow with his hand, the evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude that due to the position of the victim, the manner in which she was struck, and the damage resulting therefrom that appellant intended to administer a fatal blow.
It is not a proper function for this Court to invade the province of the jury and draw a different conclusion by weighing the evidence. Whether we would reach a different conclusion from the evidence is beside the point. The question at issue is whether there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury. Alfaro v. State (1985), Ind., 478 N.E.2d 670. I would not second-guess the jury in this case.
I would affirm the trial court in all respects.