APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT. The Honorable Carol Orbison, Senior Judge. Cause No. 49F19-1307-CM-47932.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: BARBARA J. SIMMONS, Oldenburg, Indiana.
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER, Attorney General of Indiana; RYAN J. JOHANNINGSMEIER, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana.
MAY, Judge. VAIDIK, C.J., and FRIEDLANDER, J., concur.
Jerome Yates was convicted after a jury trial of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. He argues on appeal he could not have been convicted of resisting law enforcement by fleeing because he did not have a duty to stop. We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On July 22, 2013, Officer Philip Robinette of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department saw Yates riding a bicycle in front of him. Yates was " swerving across both lanes of travel. Kind of like in an 'S' pattern on his bicycle." (Tr. at 107.) Officer Robinette, who was a member of the bike unit and had been trained on bicycle laws, noted Yates did not have any type of audible device required by law on his bicycle.
Yates turned around and saw the patrol car. At that point, he " began to frantically pedal . . . like he was doing a marathon with his bicycle." ( Id. at 113.) Officer Robinette turned on the light bar on top of his patrol car and tripped the siren three or four times. Yates again turned around and looked at the patrol car, then turned onto a nearby street without signaling.
Officer Robinette followed Yates and had to speed up his patrol car to keep up with him. Yates attempted to turn into a gravel driveway, but fell off of his bicycle. Officer Robinette got out of his car and yelled " Police, stop." ( Id. at 119-20.) Yates ran away. Officer Robinette followed, chasing Yates over a chain link fence and between houses, ordering Yates at least once more to stop. Robinette eventually caught Yates. The State charged him with Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.
DISCUSSION AND DECISION
We review de novo trial court determinations of reasonable suspicion. Armfield v. State, 918 N.E.2d 316, 319 (Ind. 2009). We make reasonable-suspicion determinations by looking at the totality of the circumstances of each case to see whether the detaining officer had ...