Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowAn Evansville woman who took several shots at her ex-friend’s home in the middle of the night could not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals that her conduct wasn’t criminal recklessness.
Former friends and current neighbors Emily Blair and Amy Grannan had a falling out and stopped all contact with each other in 2017. Then in May of that year, Grannan shot several bullets into the side of Blair’s home.
On the evening of the crime, Blair had expressed concern to a mutual friend about Grannan’s welfare after hearing a gunshot outside coming from that direction. Officers who came to the scene couldn’t find anything, but the next day Blair discovered a bullet hole in the north wall of her bathroom and a matching bullet hole in the bathroom’s south wall. A closet was on the other side of that wall, and Blair found a 9 millimeter bullet on the closet’s floor.
A bullet trajectory analysis indicated the shots were fired from Grannan’s back porch, and officers later obtained a search warrant for Grannan’s home. Inside they found a gun sight that was designed for use with a handgun, along with a proof of purchase document stating that Grannan had bought a 9 millimeter Smith & Wesson handgun.
They also found a box of 9 millimeter ammunition and a gun lock. Although they found no gun, a resident who lived over a mile away found a handgun with a matching serial number in his backyard while mowing.
Grannan was charged and convicted of Level 5 felony criminal recklessness. She was sentenced to two years, with 30 days executed and the remainder to be served on a mixture of work release and probation.
In affirming her conviction, the Indiana Court of Appeals disagreed with Grannan’s claim that her conduct did not fall within the purview of the offense of criminal recklessness because Blair’s home was not inhabited when she fired the shot. Blair was on her back porch, Grannan argued, and there was no evidence her children were home.
But “(t)he plain language of the statute also applies to a building ‘where people are likely to gather,’ and Blair’s home fits this definition,” Senior Judge Randall Shepard wrote. “… Grannan later admitted that she knew Blair had returned home. This evidence is sufficient to establish that Grannan’s act posed a substantial risk of bodily injury.”
The case is Amy M. Grannan v. State of Indiana, 20A-CR-1907.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.