Lutz v. State

I agree with the majority’s disposition of the second assignment of error. However, because I believe we should reach the merits of the first assignment of error, and affirm, I concur.

The views I express are novel and probably idiosyncratic. They express, no doubt, the personal and professional frustrations of a recent past member of the trial and *286appellate bars, who agonized over confusing, seemingly arcane and arbitrary principles of preservation and review-ability.1 As such, my concurrence is not a criticism of the majority’s application of those principles, but a call for a reevaluation…