Ray v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1DissentYoung, Judge
I respectfully dissent. The majority's opinion essentially grants the state a new trial on its affirmative defense of laches. Under our rules, however, we will grant a new trial only when the trial court has erred and a new trial is the only fair and practicable way to correct the error. Ind. Rules of Procedure, Appellate Rule 15(N); see Clouse v. Fielder, (1982) Ind.App., 431 N.E.2d 148 ({new trial appropriate only upon issues affected by trial court error). Here, the state alleges no error affecting its affirmative defense of laches; thus, the state is not entitled to present additional…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Frankie Joe Todd v. A. L. Lockhart, Superintendent, Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department of CorrectionCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
- Turman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1979
- F. W. Means & Co. v. CarstensIndiana Court of Appeals · 1981
- Clouse v. FielderIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.