Court Opinion

ID: 9713721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:20:54.348915+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:20.085670
License: Public Domain

DeBRULER, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
Count II contains the allegation that the conspiracy to commit kidnapping was completed by the overt acts of handecuffing and gagging the victim Reeves. Count III contains the allegation that the commission of the actual kidnapping or confinement of Reeves occurred when the victim was handcuffed and gagged. Where the State's theory is that the conduct constituting the overt act in furtherance of an agreement to commit a substantive crime is the same as the conduct constituting that substantive crime, I would hold that the conspiracy and substantive crimes are insufficiently distinguishable to be separately punished. Smedley v. State (1990), Ind., 561 N.E.2d 776, 783 (opinion of DeBruler, J., concurring and dissenting). See also Wethington v. State (1990), Ind., 560 N.E.2d 496. The same overlap exists between Counts VIII and IX with respect to the victim Lanum. I would reverse the separate conspiracy convictions under Count II and VIII. Otherwise, I concur.