Weatherspoon v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
VAIDIK, Judge.
Case Summary
Austin C. Weatherspoon appeals his conviction for Class B felony robbery, contending that the jury was improperly instructed. Specifically, Indiana Jury Rule 20(a)(8) provides that jurors, including alternates, are permitted to discuss the evidence among themselves in the jury room during recesses from trial when all are present, as long as they reserve judgment about the outcome of the case until deliberations commence. Under Indiana law, alternates are not allowed 'to deliberate with the jury. Weatherspoon argues that discussions are the equivalent of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Miller v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
- Griffin v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
- Henri v. CurtoIndiana Supreme Court · 2009
- Griffin v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2002
- Taylor v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1997
3Cited by7 opinions
- Treadway v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2010
- Rice v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2009
- Joe Paul Hambel v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2019
- Larry Lyons, Jr. v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
- Cheyanne v. Meredith v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.