Court Opinion

ID: 9782747
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 19:11:39.064945+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:35:10.793263
License: Public Domain

BRADFORD, Judge,
concurring in part and concurring in result in part.
Because I believe, absent invited error, that the trial court could enter judgment of conviction on the jury’s verdict of guilty for Alberto’s intentional murder in order to cure a double jeopardy violation, I must respectfully concur in result as to this issue only. In Carter, the Indiana Supreme Court stated that “[i]f a conviction for a greater offense is reversed for reasons specific to the incremental elements between the greater and a lesser included offense, a conviction for the lesser offense may remain valid.” Carter, 750 N.E.2d at 781 n. 9. If a guilty verdict on which judgment of conviction has not been entered remains viable for one purpose, it remains viable for all purposes, including situations such as this one.
In all other respects, I concur with the majority opinion.