Home/Indiana Supreme Court/Shepherd v. State

Shepherd v. State

538 N.E.2d 242, 1989 Ind. LEXIS 148, 1989 WL 56978
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedMay 23, 1989
Docket09S00-8711-CR-1056
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 538 N.E.2d 242 (Shepherd v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shepherd v. State, 538 N.E.2d 242, 1989 Ind. LEXIS 148, 1989 WL 56978 (Ind. 1989).

Opinions

GIVAN, Justice.

A jury trial resulted in the conviction of appellant of the crime of Murder, for which she received a sentence of forty (40) years.

Appellant, her husband, and the vie-tim were involved in an extramarital triangle which the jury found to result in appellant killing the victim. Although the evidence in this case is sufficient to sustain the verdict, it was entirely circumstantial. One of the State's witnesses, Jenny Lynn Okuly, testified that she was an inmate in the jail with appellant, that she had often talked with appellant about the alleged murder, and that at all times appellant had denied having anything to do with it. The prosecuting attorney then asked, "Do you believe that to be the truth?"

Appellant's attorney immediately vigorously objected and properly pointed out to the court that such a question is highly improper and invades the province of the jury. The judge at first sustained the objection, but later, after argument by the prosecuting attorney, permitted the witness to answer that she did not believe that appellant was telling the truth when she denied killing the victim.

This Court has repeatedly stated that such a question is highly improper. Neither lay witnesses nor expert witnesses are competent to testify that another witness is or is not telling the truth. Head v. State (1988), Ind., 519 N.E.2d 151 and cases cited therein.

This case is therefore reversed and remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

SHEPARD, C.J., and PIVARNIK and DICKSON, JJ., concur. DeBRULER, J., concurs and dissents with separate opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tyrice J. Halliburton v. State of Indiana
1 N.E.3d 670 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2013)
Timothy Alex Lear v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2013
Hoglund v. State
945 N.E.2d 166 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2011)
Rose v. State
846 N.E.2d 363 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2006)
Lanham v. Commonwealth
171 S.W.3d 14 (Kentucky Supreme Court, 2005)
Washington v. State
808 N.E.2d 617 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2004)
Blanchard v. State
802 N.E.2d 14 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2004)
Hook v. State
705 N.E.2d 219 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1999)
Marvelle v. State
966 P.2d 151 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1998)
Charles Calhoun, Jr. v. Al. C. Parke
142 F.3d 439 (Seventh Circuit, 1998)
Angleton v. State
686 N.E.2d 803 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1997)
Callis v. State
684 N.E.2d 233 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1997)
Hobson v. State
675 N.E.2d 1090 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1996)
Dietrich v. State
641 N.E.2d 679 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1994)
Nordstrom v. State
627 N.E.2d 1380 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1994)
Walker v. State
621 N.E.2d 627 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1993)
Jones v. State
581 N.E.2d 1256 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1991)
Jarrett v. State
580 N.E.2d 245 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1991)
State v. Shepherd
569 N.E.2d 683 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1991)
Stewart v. State
555 N.E.2d 121 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
538 N.E.2d 242, 1989 Ind. LEXIS 148, 1989 WL 56978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shepherd-v-state-ind-1989.