Summary
The Indiana appellate court affirmed Crawford’s conviction for Class C felony burglary. It held that a list of missing money orders was properly admitted under the past recollection recorded exception to the hearsay rule and that sufficient evidence supported the verdict, including the defendant’s presence in a recently observed getaway vehicle containing stolen property.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court improperly admitted the employee's written list of missing money orders as hearsay without a foundation under the business-record exception.
- Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain Crawford's burglary conviction.
Holdings
- The list was properly admitted under the past-recollection-recorded exception, even though the prosecution did not lay the best possible foundation, because Crawford objected only on hearsay and business-record grounds and the underlying master list was available for the defense's use and would have been admissible if the bank employee had been available.
- The evidence was sufficient to sustain Crawford's burglary conviction.
Key quotations
“In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence we do not weigh the evidence or judge credibility. We consider only that evidence most favorable to the State, together with all reasonable and logical inferences to be drawn therefrom.” (717)
“When there is substantial evidence of probative value supporting the jury's verdict, the conviction will not be set aside.” (717)
Factual background
A burglary occurred at the Ford Market in Centerville, Indiana, at approximately 10:10 p.m. A patrol officer observed a green Cadillac leaving the area at high speed, and another observer reported the vehicle's license plate after seeing it proceed with its lights off. Police stopped the Cadillac approximately twenty minutes after the burglary and found Crawford and two other individuals inside, along with rolls of change and money orders taken from the market. At trial, a market employee testified about and introduced a list of missing money orders compiled from a master list and records of sold and unsold money orders.
Procedural history
A jury found Crawford guilty of burglary, Class C felony. The Indiana Court of Appeals reviewed the admission of a list of missing money orders and the sufficiency of the evidence, and affirmed the judgment.