Vela v. State
This text of 615 N.E.2d 913 (Vela v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
A jury convicted Vela of child molesting, a Class D felony, on evidence that he fondled a thirteen year old resident of the home for wayward boys where Vela was a staff member. The evidence sustains the verdict.
Vela presents two issues on appeal concerning the use of evidence at his trial [914]*914of other uncharged similar offenses. The evidence was admitted under the depraved sexual instinct rule, which our supreme court abolished in Lannan v. State (1992) Ind., 600 N.E.2d 1334. Vela’s trial was conducted before Lannan was decided.
Vela made no objection when the evidence was introduced at trial. Any potential error was therefore waived. Mason v. State (1989) Ind., 539 N.E.2d 468.
Vela also contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his counsel did not object to this evidence. This argument is also unavailing. Had counsel objected, the objection would have been properly overruled under the state of the law prevailing at trial. Counsel is not guilty of providing ineffective assistance merely for failing to anticipate that some change in the law might occur. See, e.g., McChristian v. State (1987) Ind., 511 N.E.2d 297, 302.
There was no error.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
615 N.E.2d 913, 1993 Ind. App. LEXIS 693, 1993 WL 212360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vela-v-state-indctapp-1993.