Lane v. State
Indiana Supreme Court
1DissentPrentice, Justice
I dissent from the majority’s treatment of Issue III. The rule of Williams v. State, (1979) Ind., 395 N.E.2d 239, 248-49, is a severe departure from the common law concepts of the offense of Robbery, does not comport to the language of the robbery statute, and should be overruled.
*32By its terms Ind.Code § 35-42-5-1 creates an offense against the person. In Indiana Robbery has always been an offense against the person. Chizum v. State, (1932) 203 Ind. 450, 453, 180 N.E. 674, 675; Hickey v. State, (1864) 23 Ind. 21, 22. To prove the offense, there must be a taking of property from a person or his…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Swope v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1975
- Jackson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1971
- Williams v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1979
- Rogers v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1979
- Ferguson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1980
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.