« Law - "28 of 50 Top Law Schools Still Accepting Applications for Fall Semester" |
| Ind. Decisions - Still more on: Thoughts on today's decision in Erasmo Leyva, Jr. v. State of Indiana? »
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Ind. Decisions - More responses to: Thoughts on today's decision in Erasmo Leyva, Jr. v. State of Indiana?
In response to this ILB entry from earlier this afternoon, and this response, another reader writes:
The prosecutor who wrote to you about Leyva needs to do a little more research. According to your posting, this person wrote, “Second, the ‘incredible dubiosity’ rule (which is an Indiana concept) that Judge Baker has primarily based his dissent upon has actually never been used to reverse an Indiana conviction.”
There are at least two. Penn v. State, 146 N.E.2d 240 (Ind. 1957) and Sisson v. State, 710 N.E.2d 203 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
And Prof. Joel Schumm writes:
More than fifty years ago, the Indiana Supreme Court in Penn v. State unanimously reversed a conviction for statutory rape of a sixteen-year-old girl because the justices found her testimony that she and the defendant's wife shared the same bed with the defendant "so improbable as to challenge the credibility of her entire testimony." It is quite a read from an era when Ward and June Cleaver slept in separate beds. [ILB: Or Ricky and Lucy] This is the only Supreme Court case I know of that has reversed a conviction based on the incredible dubiosity rule.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 25, 2012 03:39 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions | Leyva Discussion