Court Opinion

ID: 9716500
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 06:42:14.403048+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:46.111673
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion
Hunter, J.
Appellant states his equal protection claim in rhetorical question: “Did not the legislature, . . . abuse its constitutional power in defining ‘adult stealing’ [kidnapping] and ‘child stealing’ and affixing a higher penalty for adult stealing.” The answer to appellant’s question is no. A person under age fourteen may either be “stolen,” see Drury v. State, (1970) 253 Ind. 392, 254 N.E.2d 335, or “kidnapped,” see Cox v. State, (1932) 203 Ind. 544, 177 N.E. 898, depending upon the circumstances.
Note. — Reported at 339 N.E.2d 551.