# Corcoran v. State

> Indiana Supreme Court · December 6, 2000 · 739 N.E.2d 649

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9505598

## Case

- **Full name:** Joseph E. CORCORAN, Defendant-Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Plaintiff-Appellee
- **Court:** Indiana Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 6, 2000
- **Citations:** 739 N.E.2d 649; 2000 Ind. LEXIS 1142; 2000 WL 1808293
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Shepard
- **Judges:** Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, Rucker, Shepard
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9505598

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that for fundamental error to exist, court “must find that [the error] so prejudiced the defendant’s rights as to make a fair trial impossible.”
- explaining that the reviewing court looks to “the role of non-statutory aggravating matters” in the judge’s sentencing statement
- noting appellate recourse not available for review of alleged trial misconduct when complaining party failed to timely object at trial

## Opinion text

SHEPARD, Chief Justice,
concurring.
I join in the Court’s decision to remand, largely because meticulous attention to capital cases at an early stage saves a good deal of effort later on.
I read Judge Gull’s statements about Corcoran’s multiple murders as explanations about why she gave high weight to the (b)(8) aggravator and I would be willing to affirm her on that basis, as it takes little analysis to conclude that four killings make for a weighty aggravating circumstance. Nevertheless, I agree that it is worth clarifying now that only statutory aggravating circumstances are being considered.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9505598. Public record. Not legal advice.