Court Opinion

ID: 9505677
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:14:14.270291+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:41.240820
License: Public Domain

BOEHM, Justice,
concurring in result.
I agree that Collins’ two convictions for criminal deviate conduct are permissible. However, for the reasons explained in my concurring opinion in Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32, 57 (Ind.1999), I base my conclusion on the common law rule of Thompson v. State, 259 Ind. 587, 592, 290 N.E.2d 724, 727 (1972), which requires the facts giving rise to the offenses be “independently supportable, separate and distinct.” Here there were two distinct acts, each a violation of Indiana Code- § 35-42-4-2 as “criminal deviate conduct” is defined by Indiana Code § 35^41-1-9. Because the charging instrument properly identified each violation, the convictions are proper.
SELBY, J., concurs.