Skip to main content

McCoy v. State

Citations

  • 574 N.E.2d 304
  • 1991 Ind. App. LEXIS 1032
  • 1991 WL 115543

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that despite lack of definitions for “fondling” and “touching,” jury could rely on common sense and common knowledge of terms
  • declining to find that the “prosecutor purposefully misstated the law” but nevertheless “[a]ssuming” that the defendant showed “improprieties under case law or canons of conduct”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rucker, Chezem, Conover

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

28 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.