Opinion
Court of Appeals Case No. 20A-CR-1640
02-26-2021
Steven DEBERNARDI, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
Attorney for Appellant: Timothy J. Burns, Indianapolis, Indiana Attorneys for Appellee: Theodore E. Rokita, Attorney General of Indiana, Tina L. Mann, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
Attorney for Appellant: Timothy J. Burns, Indianapolis, Indiana
Attorneys for Appellee: Theodore E. Rokita, Attorney General of Indiana, Tina L. Mann, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
MEMORANDUM DECISION
Robb, Judge.
Case Summary and Issue
[1] Following a bench trial, Steven DeBernardi was found guilty of strangulation, a Level 6 felony. DeBernardi was sentenced to 545 days in the Indiana Department of Correction ("DOC") with 541 days suspended. DeBernardi now appeals raising one issue, whether the State presented sufficient evidence to rebut DeBernardi's claim of self-defense. Concluding the State sufficiently rebutted his claim of self-defense, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] The facts most favorable to the judgment are as follows. In October 2019, DeBernardi was living with his neighbor Elana Hayes while he renovated his home. On October 24, Hayes and DeBernardi got into an argument about Hayes’ dogs needing to be let outside and DeBernardi smoking a cigarette inside Hayes’ home. Hayes told DeBernardi that he needed "to leave now[;]" however, DeBernardi refused to leave. Transcript of the Record, Volume 2 at 11. DeBernardi stepped out onto the porch and Hayes tried to shut him outside by closing the door. DeBernardi attempted to reenter the home by shoving the door open with his shoulder. At this point, the two began "pulling and ... tussling" and DeBernardi dragged Hayes out of the home. Id. at 12. While on the porch, DeBernardi pushed Hayes causing her to fall over.
[3] The pair continued to "tussl[e]" out onto the grass, on the sidewalk, and next to the car. Id. DeBernardi was eventually able to get back into the home. Hayes followed him and DeBernardi forcefully pushed her against the wall. Hayes picked up a "broom or mop" and swung it at DeBernardi and hit him in the arm. Id. at 15. After Hayes hit DeBernardi, DeBernardi again pushed her up against the wall, put his arm around her neck, flipped her over by her neck, and started choking her. Hayes yelled, "I cannot breathe" and started to black out. Id. at 16. DeBernardi let her go and left the house.
[4] Several hours later, Hayes went to the emergency room at IU Health Methodist where she was examined by forensic nurse Barbra Bachmeier. Bachmeier testified that Hayes had a bruise on her lower lip, right side neck tenderness, tenderness to her right shoulder and right upper chest, and bruising on her right lower leg. See id. at 25.
Bachmeier testified that a forensic nurse is one that has been specially trained to care for patients who have experienced interpersonal violence. See Tr., Vol. 2 at 23.
[5] On October 28, 2019, the State charged DeBernardi with strangulation, a Level 6 felony, and domestic battery, a Class A misdemeanor enhanced to a Level 6 felony due to a prior conviction. DeBernardi waived trial by jury and the court found DeBernardi guilty of strangulation and sentenced him to 545 days in the DOC with 541 days suspended. DeBernardi now appeals.
The court also found him guilty of domestic battery but ultimately vacated that conviction due to double jeopardy concerns.
Discussion and Decision
Sufficiency of Self-Defense
[6] DeBernardi argues that there was insufficient evidence in the record to rebut his self-defense claim. The standard on appellate review of a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence to rebut a claim of self-defense is the same as the standard for any sufficiency of the evidence claim. Wallace v. State , 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000). We neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Id. If there is sufficient evidence of probative value to support the conclusion of the trier of fact, then the judgment will not be disturbed. Id.
[7] "A person is justified in using reasonable force against any other person to protect [himself] ... from what [he] reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force." Ind. Code § 35-41-3-2(c). A valid claim of self-defense is a legal justification for an otherwise criminal act. Birdsong v. State , 685 N.E.2d 42, 45 (Ind. 1997).
[8] When a defendant raises a claim of self-defense, he is required to show three facts: (1) he was in a place where he had a right to be; (2) he acted without fault; and (3) he had a reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm. Wallace, 725 N.E.2d at 840. Once a defendant claims self-defense, the State bears the burden of disproving at least one of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt for the defendant's claim to fail. Hood v. State , 877 N.E.2d 492, 497 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), trans. denied. The State may meet this burden by rebutting the defense directly, by affirmatively showing the defendant did not act in self-defense, or by simply relying upon the sufficiency of its evidence in chief. Id. Whether the State has met its burden is a question of fact for the factfinder. Id.
[9] DeBernardi argues that he was in a place he had a right to be because he was paying Hayes rent to live in her home; that Hayes was the initial aggressor; and that Hayes attempting to hit him in the head with a broom reasonably put him in fear of death or great bodily harm. See Br. of Appellant at 12. We disagree.
[10] Regardless of whether Hayes was the aggressor or initiated the fight, if DeBernardi was a mutual combatant and did not "declare an armistice," he may not claim self-defense. Wooley v. State, 716 N.E.2d 919, 926 (Ind. 1999) ; see Ind. Code § 35-41-3-2(g)(3) ("[A] person is not justified in using force if ... the person has entered into combat with another person ... unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the other person the intent to do so and the other person nevertheless continues[.]").
[11] Hayes testified that she and DeBernardi "tussl[ed]" outside the home including in the grass, on the sidewalk, and next to the car. Tr., Vol. 2 at 12. After DeBernardi was able to get back into the home, and Hayes followed him, DeBernardi forcefully pushed her against the wall. Hayes then picked up a pole and swung it at DeBernardi, hitting him in the arm. DeBernardi then pushed her up against the wall again, put his arm around her neck, flipped her over, and started choking her.
[12] Hayes’ testimony is evidence that DeBernardi was a mutual combatant and DeBernardi presents no evidence that he at any point "declare[d] an armistice" after which Hayes continued the fight. See Wooley , 716 N.E.2d at 926. DeBernardi asks us to reweigh the evidence which we will not do. Wallace , 725 N.E.2d at 840 ; see Griffin v. State, 997 N.E.2d 375, 381 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) ("Whether a defendant acted in self-defense is a question of fact ... for the finder of fact."), trans. denied.
[13] Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, the evidence supports a conclusion that DeBernardi was a mutual combatant and did not withdraw from the fight or communicate an intent to do so. Accordingly, the State's evidence was sufficient to rebut DeBernardi's self-defense claim.
To the extent DeBernardi argues there was insufficient proof of strangulation, he does not cite to the strangulation statute or the elements thereof, and his challenge to the proof of injury is irrelevant because an injury is not an element of the crime and Hayes’ testimony alone proves strangulation. See Chambless v. State , 119 N.E.3d 182, 193 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019) ("A conviction can be sustained on the uncorroborated testimony of a single witness, even when that witness is the victim."), trans. denied.
--------
Conclusion
[14] We conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence to refute DeBernardi's self-defense claim. Therefore, we affirm.
[15] Affirmed.
Bailey, J., and Tavitas, J., concur.