ILNews

Self-defense claim of man who killed 2 fails on appeal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An Indianapolis man’s claim that the state failed to disprove his claim of self defense did not persuade the Indiana Court of Appeals to revisit his two murder convictions and sentence of 115 years in prison.

Razien McCullough was convicted of the December 2010 killings of Lawrence Miles and Miles’ young daughter, Archie, with whom McCullough and the child’s mother shared a home. After an argument in the basement, McCullough obtained a handgun and shot the victims in the head, according to the court record. McCullough concealed the victims’ bodies on a back porch before calling police.

“The only evidence that he acted without fault or that his reactions were reasonable was contained in his statement to police, an audio recording of which was played to the jury. The jury, however, was under no obligation to credit this evidence and did not,” Judge Cale Bradford wrote for the court in an eight-page ruling.

 “In light of the nature of his offenses and his character, McCullough has failed to establish that his 115-year aggregate sentence for two murders is inappropriate,” Bradford wrote in Razien McCullough v. State of Indiana, 49A02-1210-CR-789.

The case on appeal from Marion Superior Judge Mark Stoner relies exclusively on an audio/video record prepared under a pilot project, the court indicated in a footnote. The panel of Bradford and judges James Kirsch and Melissa May will review about 15 cases from Stoner’s court and a like number from courts in Allen County and Tippecanoe County.

 



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Frankly, it is tragic that you are even considering going to an expensive, unaccredited "law school." It is extremely difficult to get a job with a degree from a real school. If you are going to make the investment of time, money, and tears into law school, it should not be to a place that won't actually enable you to practice law when you graduate.

  2. As a lawyer who grew up in Fort Wayne (but went to a real law school), it is not that hard to find a mentor in the legal community without your school's assistance. One does not need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to go to an unaccredited legal diploma mill to get a mentor. Having a mentor means precisely nothing if you cannot get a job upon graduation, and considering that the legal job market is utterly terrible, these students from Indiana Tech are going to be adrift after graduation.

  3. 700,000 to 800,000 Americans are arrested for marijuana possession each year in the US. Do we need a new justice center if we decriminalize marijuana by having the City Council enact a $100 fine for marijuana possession and have the money go towards road repair?

  4. I am sorry to hear this.

  5. I tried a case in Judge Barker's court many years ago and I recall it vividly as a highlight of my career. I don't get in federal court very often but found myself back there again last Summer. We had both aged a bit but I must say she was just as I had remembered her. Authoritative, organized and yes, human ...with a good sense of humor. I also appreciated that even though we were dealing with difficult criminal cases, she treated my clients with dignity and understanding. My clients certainly respected her. Thanks for this nice article. Congratulations to Judge Barker for reaching another milestone in a remarkable career.

ADVERTISEMENT