Johnathon I. Carter v. State of Indiana

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that trial court's failure to give defendant's incomplete instruction on jury unanimity was not fundamental error where the case \largely turn[ed] on credibility.\
• holding that the forensic interviewer’s testimony did not constitute impermissible vouching where she did not express opinions on the victim’s credibility and her testimony was broad and generalized
• finding consecutive sentences inappropriate and directing that two of the three sentences be served concurrently
• noting the element of intent “may be established by circumstantial evidence and may be inferred from the actor’s conduct and the natural and usual consequence to which such conduct usually points”
• “the uncorroborated testimony of the victim, even if the victim is a minor, is sufficient to sustain a conviction”
• “That no other person testified to witnessing or hearing [the victim] being molested does not establish that the abuse did not happen”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).