Smoote v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that joinder of offenses was proper because the defendant killed the victim to ensure that the victim would not implicate him in another crime
• holding circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove defendant shot victim
• finding a proper joinder of offenses where “State’s theory . . . was that the defendant killed the victim in order to assure that the victim would not implicate him in the bank robbery”
• joinder of murder and drug dealing charges appropriate because State’s theory of the case was that murder occurred because victim had not paid for Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A05-1710-CR-2434 | May 30, 2018 Page 5 of 8 drugs supplied to him by defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).