Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Combs v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided August 4, 2006No. 67A05-0511-CR-652Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

.VAIDIK, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree with the majority that the war-rantless search of the car was proper. However, I part ways with the majority's analysis and conclusion on the inappropriate sentence issue. I therefore concur in part and dissent in part.

The jury found Combs guilty of Class C felony possession of methamphetamine, Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia, and Class A misdemeanor car*1064rying a handgun without a license. The trial court identified as aggravators that Combs violated the conditions of his release on bond in the instant case by…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Childress v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Lewis v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
  4. Johnson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2005
  5. Williams v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2005

3 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