Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 7, 2008No. 45A03-0708-CR-357PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BAKER, Chief Judge.

A person commits aggravated battery by knowingly or intentionally inflicting in jury on a person that causes protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member or organ. 1 The case before us requires us to address as an issue of first impression whether a tooth is a “bodily member or organ” within the definition of this statute. Relying on caselaw from other jurisdictions interpreting similar aggravated battery statutes, we conclude that a tooth is a “bodily member or organ” within the definition of Indiana’s aggravated battery statute.

Appellant-defendan…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Richardson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Ludy v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Mendoza v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007
  4. Vasquez v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Clark v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2000

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Williams v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. Moala v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2012
  3. Jeffrey Z. Hayden v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2014
  4. Charles S. Whitham v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015
  5. Bryson Tyrone Street v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2015

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API