Gary Tipler v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: ANN M. SUTTON Marion County Public Defender STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana CHASITY THOMPSON ADEWOPO Marion County Public Defender Agency Indianapolis, Indiana ARTHUR THADDEUS PERRY Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA GARY TIPLER, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 49A02-0604-CR-343 APPEAL FROM THE MARION COUNTY COURT The Honorable Danielle Gaughan, Commissioner Cause No. 49G16-0502-FD-024783 November 3, 2006 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION CRONE, Judge Gary Tipler appeals his convictions for class D felony intimidation 1 and class A misdemeanor domestic battery. 2 He claims the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. In reviewing claims of insufficient evidence, we consider only the evidence most favorable to the judgment and the reasonable inferences therefrom, and we may not reweigh the evidence or reassess witness credibility. Brown v. State, 830 N.E.2d 956, 967-68 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). Therefore, we may not, as Tipler requests, reconsider his testimony. Dana Bryant testified that Tipler threatened to kill her for talking to his mother on the phone. Bryant s testimony is sufficient to sustain Tipler s intimidation conviction. See Id. ( We will affirm if there is probative evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. ). Bryant also testified that Tipler hit her in the eye and in the chest with his closed fist, causing her pain in both locations as well as swelling around her eye. 3 This testimony is sufficient to sustain Tipler s domestic battery conviction. Id. Accordingly, we affirm. Affirmed. BAKER, J., and VAIDIK, J., concur. 1 Ind. Code § 35-45-2-1. 2 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3. 3 See Ind. Code § 35-41-1-4 (defining bodily injury as any impairment of physical condition, including physical pain. ). 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.