Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Whatley v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided April 8, 1999No. 36A05-9806-CR-307Published

1ConcurrenceSullivan, Judge

Notwithstanding my concurrence in Atkins v. State (1983) Ind.App., 451 N.E.2d 55, I am somewhat troubled by the extension of the public intoxication definition of “public place” to the public indecency statute. It appears that our past decisions in the public intoxication context have been driven by policy considerations. However, as noted by the majority, a public place must be accessible to the public, and I find it difficult to accept the *69premise that the inside of a closed vehicle traveling upon the highway is accessible to members of the public. Be that as it may, while I may at this…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chubb v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. SevierIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Lasko v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Atkins v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1983
  5. Thompson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API