Fields v. State

The majority opinion acknowledges the law as set forth in Washington v. State (1987) Ind., 517 N.E.2d 77 yet proceeds to disregard it. A creative but unpersuasive rationale is fashioned for ignoring Washington. The majority concludes that it is “reasonable to presume that a defendant who has a valid license for his handgun will present that license to avoid conviction for the crime” (Op. *32at 30) and that therefore such a defendant will never be convicted of possession of a handgun without a license and another crime involving that firearm. While the innovative speculation is an understandable…