holding that initial detention of defendant, a passenger in a vehicle, was valid where vehicle was stopped based upon probable cause to arrest another passenger
How later courts described this case
- holding that initial detention of defendant, a passenger in a vehicle, was valid where vehicle was stopped based upon probable cause to arrest another passenger
- pointing out victim's positive attributes as a child "in no way provides insight into the contemporaneous and prospective circumstances surrounding his death"
- “In viewing the cumulative effect of these errors we also find they do not require reversal of this case.”
- diagrams of victim's injuries
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
CHAPEL, P.J.,
dissenting.
¶ 1 I would reverse and remand this ease for a new trial as I find merit in Brown’s first proposition of error. The majority finds error but resolves the error by judging it harmless. In so doing, the majority winks at *936 a very serious constitutional violation. The majority justifies its action by noting that evidence, other than that which ought to have been excluded, proves Brown was guilty. My own view is that in the case of serious constitutional errors, this court should reverse and require the State to do it right. If, as the majority argues, the evidence was otherwise sufficient, the outcome will be the same. But this Court by its action would have upheld the constitution. Winking at serious constitutional errors, while expedient, degrades and demeans our rights.