Court Opinion

ID: 9742945
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:23:05.737172+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:37.920618
License: Public Domain

Mr. JUSTICE BARRY, specially concurring: Although, I agree with the result reached in the majority opinion, I do not agree the majority- opinion should have decided an issue which it deems was waived. The dicta concerning the sufficiency of evidence of bodily harm creates some precedent, which, although not binding, certain members of this court may feel compelled to follow. On occasion, we have, in dicta, discussed an issue because, on remandment, we thought the trial court would be better served by direction concerning that issue. However, the majority in this case affirms the judgment of the trial court. There is no remandment and certainly no reason to give direction to the trial court. As a result, I believe the unnecessary language should have been deleted. Since it was not deleted however, I choose to attempt hereby to limit its precedential value as much as possible.