Watkins v. State

575 N.E.2d 624, 1991 Ind. LEXIS 134, 1991 WL 138175
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 24, 1991
Docket79S02-9107-CR-568
StatusPublished
Cited by32 cases

This text of 575 N.E.2d 624 (Watkins 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
Watkins v. State, 575 N.E.2d 624, 1991 Ind. LEXIS 134, 1991 WL 138175 (Ind. 1991).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The State charged appellant Arthur J. Watkins with child molesting, Ind.Code § 85-42-4-3(b), a class C felony (count I); attempted child molesting, Ind.Code § 385-4l-5-1, 85-42-4-8(a), a class B felony (count II); and child molesting, Ind.Code § 35-42-4-3(a), a class B felony (count III) (West 1986). He was found guilty by a jury and also determined to be an habitual offender.

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the trial court except with respect to the conviction on count III. It held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction on that count. Watkins v. State (1991), Ind.App., 571 N.E.2d 1262.

All three counts alleged acts occurring during an incident between Watkins and his son J.W. on October 19, 1988. Count I alleged that Watkins fondled and touched J.W. with intent to arouse and satisfy his sexual desires. Count II alleged that Watkins attempted to commit child molesting by lying on top of J.W. while the child was nude and face down and that Watkins placed his penis around and against the anal area of J.W.

*625 Watkins asserts that his convictions for these acts, committed within moments of each other as part of one incident, cannot stand under the rule announced in Bowling v. State (1990), Ind., 560 N.E.2d 658. He is correct.

We grant transfer. We reverse the conviction for child molesting as entered on count I. The decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the conviction and sentence on count II and reversing the conviction on count III is otherwise affirmed. Ind.Appellate Rule 11(B)(8).

SHEPARD, C.J., and DeBRULER, GIVAN, DICKSON and KRAHULIK, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gregory A. Rose v. State of Indiana
36 N.E.3d 1055 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2015)
Johnathon I. Carter v. State of Indiana
31 N.E.3d 17 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2015)
Benjamin E. Freed v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2014
Joseph Barefield v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2013
Stanley Short v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2013
Danny Boling v. State of Indiana
982 N.E.2d 1055 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2013)
Ronald Rostochak v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012
Dennis Vermillion v. State of Indiana
978 N.E.2d 459 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012)
Dennis Feyka v. State of Indiana
972 N.E.2d 387 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012)
Kocielko v. State
938 N.E.2d 243 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2010)
Scott v. State
771 N.E.2d 718 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
575 N.E.2d 624, 1991 Ind. LEXIS 134, 1991 WL 138175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/watkins-v-state-ind-1991.