Court Opinion

ID: 9803469
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 15:39:39.960464+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:03:11.272987
License: Public Domain

VAIDIK, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
For the reasons set forth in my dissent in Smith v. State, No. 24A01-1210-CR-469, 993 N.E.2d 1185, 2013 WL 5010978 (Ind.Ct.App. Sept. 13, 2013), I do not agree that Counts 4-6 can stand. I believe those charges, which allege that Smith knowingly, transacted business as a broker-dealer without being registered to do so, are also barred by double jeopardy. I therefore dissent as to these charges.