Court Opinion

ID: 9530758
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:03:15.458849+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:14.424780
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge,
concurring in part and concurring in result in part
I fully concur with respect to Parts II and III but concur in Part I only because there were two separate incidents of shooting. Although one might infer that all the shots fired were a part of the same over-all incident, the evidence reflects that the shots which support the criminal recklessness conviction and which did not strike anyone, were fired as DeWeese was driving her truck forward with Heather as a passenger. The other shots, two of which struck DeWeese, were fired after Heather had gotten out of the truck and run for help and as DeWeese was backing her truck toward Rodriguez.
I specifically do not base my concurrence upon the Games-Blockburger analysis utilized by the majority. See Moore v. State (1998) Ind.App., 698 N.E.2d 1203, trans. denied.