Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Ashonta Kenya Jackson v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided June 4, 2015No. 48A02-1409-CR-670Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
BAKER, JUDGE,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
[40] I respectfully dissent from the majority regarding the sufficiency of the evidence supporting Jackson’s conviction for corrupt business influence. As the majority notes, Indiana Code section 35-45-6-2(2) provides that a person commits corrupt business influence if he, “through a pattern of racketeering activity, knowingly or intentionally acquires or maintains, either directly or indirectly, an interest in or control of property or an enterprise.” A pattern of racketeering activity “means engaging in at least two (2) incidents of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Julie Kitchell v. Ted Franklin, as the Mayor of the City of Logansport, and the Common Council of the City of LogansportIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
- State Ex Rel. Monchecourt v. Vigo Circuit CourtIndiana Supreme Court · 1959