Skip to main content

Daniel v. State

Citations

  • 582 N.E.2d 364
  • 1991 Ind. LEXIS 249
  • 1991 WL 257702

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the admission of evidence relating to appellant’s fingerprints was not error where detective’s advisement regarding a warrant to obtain fingerprints to be that one would be sought rather than routinely obtained
  • consent to fingerprinting not vitiated where police advised defendant that a search warrant “would be sought” in the event of a refusal
  • consent to fingerprinting not vitiated where police advised defendant that a search warrant “would be sought” in the event of a refusal
  • “[J]ury instructions are to be considered as a whole and in reference to each other. Error in a particular instruction will not require reversal unless the entire charge misleads the jury as to the law in the case.” (citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Givan, Shepard, Krahulik, Debruler, Dickson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.