Andre Chandler v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
MEMORANDUM DECISION 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. FILED Oct 30 2020, 8:28 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Valerie K. Boots Darren Bedwell Marion County Public Defender Agency Appellate Division Indianapolis, Indiana Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Attorney General of Indiana Megan M. Smith Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Andre Chandler, October 30, 2020 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 20A-CR-826 v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court The Honorable Stanley E. Kroh, Magistrate Trial Court Cause No. 49G03-1804-F1-12451 Kirsch, Judge. [1] Andre Chandler (“Chandler”) was convicted after a jury trial of three counts of child molesting as Level 1 felonies and five counts of child molesting as Level 4 Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 1 of 3 felonies. Chandler now appeals two of his convictions for Level 4 felony child molesting, contending that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction under Original Count 9 (“Jury Count 8”),1 or in the alternative, that his convictions for the two challenged Level 4 felony convictions violated double jeopardy.2 The State agrees that the evidence at trial was insufficient to support Chandler’s conviction for Jury Count 8. At trial, when the State asked the victim where Chandler had touched her, the victim replied “his hand -- his hand -- his hand, like -- it touched my -- (witness crying).” Tr. Vol. II at 186. When the State attempted to clarify which part of her body Chandler had touched, the victim responded “[m]y -- shoulder was, uh . . . .” Id. However, the victim was crying so intensely that the State requested a brief recess. Id. Later, after her testimony resumed, the State asked the victim if Chandler ever touched her anywhere else, and she testified that he “touched [her] chest one time” and gestured toward her “upper torso.” Id. at 194. The victim clarified that she was referring to her breasts. Id. Based on the record, we agree with the parties and conclude that this testimony did not reflect that Chandler fondled the victim’s breasts on more than one occasion. We, therefore, conclude that Chandler’s conviction under Jury Count 8 was not supported by sufficient evidence, and we reverse his conviction 1 The challenged conviction was originally charged under Count 9, but later, several counts were dismissed, and, at trial, the counts were renumbered, and the challenged conviction became Jury Count 8. 2 Because we conclude that Chandler’s Level 4 child-molesting conviction from Jury Count 8 should be vacated, it is unnecessary to address Chandler’s double-jeopardy argument. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 2 of 3 for Level 4 felony child molesting under Jury Count 8. We remand to the trial court with instructions to vacate the judgment of conviction for child molesting as a Level 4 felony from Jury Count 8. [2] Reversed and remanded. Pyle, J., and Tavitas, J., concur. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 3 of 3
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.
