Opinion

Layton v. State

  • 248 Ind. 52
  • 221 N.E.2d 881
  • 1966 Ind. LEXIS 441
Court
Indiana Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 28, 1966
Status
Published
Author
Rakestraw
On the bench
Jackson, Arterburn, Myers, Rakestraw
Cited by
25 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.5%

The opinion

Dissent

.Rakestraw, J.

I must disagree with the reasoning of the majority opinion. I fully agree, of course, that you do not *55 prove one crime by proving that the defendant committed other crimes. However, if evidence is relevant to prove the crime charged, it is admissable even though it does show that other crimes were committed.

The evidence in this case involved armed robbery committed by the appellant very shortly before the crime charged and involved many identical circumstances. In my opinion, this evidence would be admissible to show the identity of appellant and to show his method of operation in the commission of robberies. The charge in this case does involve murder in the commission of a robbery and it was thus necessary to establish the robbery.

For a discussion of circumstances under which evidence of other crimes is admissible, see: West’s I. L. E., Criminal Law, §§ 221-227.

Note.—Reported in 221 N. E. 2d 881 .

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.