Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Jerry A. Smith v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided September 13, 2013No. 24A01-1210-CR-469Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partVaidik, Judge

For the reasons set forth in my dissent in Smith v. State, No. 24A01-1210-CR-469, 993 N.E.2d 1185, 2013 WL 5010978 (Ind.Ct.App. Sept. 13, 2013), I do not agree that Counts 4-6 can stand. I believe those charges, which allege that Smith knowingly, transacted business as a broker-dealer without being registered to do so, are also barred by double jeopardy. I therefore dissent as to these charges.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Smith v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013