Opinion ID: 2091764
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: conclusion

Text: Despite the many cases and secondary materials addressing the Allen charge, our decision in Lewis was the first to address the Allen charge issue from the perspective that the charge constitutes an embellishment on final instructions and, therefore, can only be read if part of a rereading of all final instructions. We clearly rejected the notion advanced by many jurisdictions, including the Seventh Circuit, that the wording of the A.B.A. standard instruction differs in its impact on juries from the original Allen charge. And as the last of the five members of our court who unanimously decided Lewis retires, it is altogether fitting that we reaffirm this important principle of Indiana criminal jurisprudence. We reverse Bailey's convictions and remand to the trial court. DeBRULER and SELBY, JJ., concur. SHEPARD, C.J., concurs with separate opinion in which DICKSON, J., concurs.