Ann Zuniga v. State of Indiana (9/27/04 IndCtApp) [Criminal Law & Procedure]
Riley, Judge
STATEMENT OF THE CASE. Appellant-Defendant, Ann Zuniga (Zuniga), appeals her conviction for visiting a common nuisance, a Class B misdemeanor, Ind. Code § 35-48-4-13(a). We reverse.Posted by Marcia Oddi at September 27, 2004 02:17 PMISSUE. Zuniga raises two issues on appeal, which we consolidate and restate as follows: whether the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain Zuniga’s conviction for visiting a common nuisance. * * *
DISCUSSION AND DECISION. Zuniga contends that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support her conviction. Specifically, Zuniga argues that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (i) she had knowledge of the common nuisance and (ii) that the common nuisance had been the location for illegal drug use on at least one prior occasion. * * *
Based on the record and testimony of witnesses, we conclude that there is insufficient evidence of probative value to sustain Zuniga’s conviction for visiting a common nuisance. Although there is sufficient evidence to prove that Zuniga had knowledge that the residence was used for the unlawful use of a controlled substance, the State failed to provide any evidence that the residence was used on more than one occasion for the unlawful use of a controlled substance. As a result, we hold that the State presented insufficient evidence to support Zuniga’s conviction for visiting a common nuisance.
CONCLUSION. Based on the foregoing, we find that the State presented insufficient evidence to sustain Zuniga’s conviction for visiting a common nuisance. Reversed.
CRONE, J., and VAIDIK, J., concur.