Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Stwalley v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1989No. 67S00-8602-CR-208Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDeBRULER, Justice

I concur with the decisions reached by the majority, except for that part which affirms appellant’s burglary conviction. I would reverse that conviction, and remand the case for retrial on that charge. The charge of burglary and the final instructions informed the jury that appellant was charged with breaking and entering the dwelling of another with the intent to commit a felony therein. The felonious intent was not described in the charge or in the instructions in any more particular manner. When a burglary charge fails to designate the particular felony which the accused intended to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bays v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Mireles v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
  3. Burnett v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1970

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API