Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Widget HTML #1

Home / Books / Law / Professional & Technical

[Download] "Kenneth D. Bryant v. State Indiana" by Supreme Court of Indiana No. 1269S285 " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

Kenneth D. Bryant v. State Indiana

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Kenneth D. Bryant v. State Indiana
  • Author : Supreme Court of Indiana No. 1269S285
  • Release Date : January 22, 1972
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 58 KB

Description

The appellant was tried by a jury in the Criminal Court of Marion County, Honorable Saul I. Rabb, Judge, presiding, and convicted of the offenses of entering to commit a felony and assault and battery with intent to kill. The appellant's co-defendant, Harold Lee Lloyd, was tried with the appellant and found guilty of the same offenses. We have previously considered co-defendant Lloyd's appeal from this conviction and, finding the evidence against Lloyd insufficient to sustain a conviction, ordered a new trial. Lloyd v. State (1971), 256 Ind. 414, 269 N.E.2d 389. The appellant here challenges the sufficiency of evidence against him in this case. He argues that the sole evidence against him, an identification by the victim, was insufficient in that the victim was a seventy-four year old man who admittedly only got a five second look at his assailant and first identified the appellant under prejudicial circumstances at a pre-trial hearing. The appellant argues that, in such a case, corroboration is needed and since there was not corroboration the evidence is insufficient. This argument is clearly specious, as it is settled law in this State, as well as in other jurisdictions, that a conviction can be supported by the identification of a single eye-witness. Moore v. State (1970), 254 Ind. 23, 256 N.E.2d 907. If the appellant believed that his identification at the trial was tainted by improper suggestion at the pre-trial stage, a pre-trial motion to suppress the identification or a motion to suppress the identification at trial would have safeguarded his rights. However, no such motion was made in this case.


PDF Books "Kenneth D. Bryant v. State Indiana" Online ePub Kindle