Legal Opinion · Dissent

Fox v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 30, 1979No. 2-376A109Published

1DissentBuchanan, Chief Judge

Unlike the majority I would affirm the judgment convicting all the defendants, for two reasons (grounds): First, there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions of the five defendants. Second, the Bruton rule should not be extended to exclude from evidence defendant York’s out-of-court statement at the joint trial.

GROUND ONE

In my opinion there was sufficient evidence to establish the guilt of Fox, Havens, York and Perry ... as well as Kapp.

In considering the sufficiency of the evidence, it is convenient to divide the discussion into two parts:

A) Were the defendants present at the…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Bruton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Lisenko v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Mobley v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
  4. McGill v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1969
  5. Cotton v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1965

17 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