Robinson v. State, No. 45S00-8606-CR-594

Docket NºNo. 45S00-8606-CR-594
Citation525 N.E.2d 605
Case DateJuly 11, 1988
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 605

525 N.E.2d 605
Jessie E. ROBINSON, Appellant (Defendant Below),
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff Below).
No. 45S00-8606-CR-594.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
July 11, 1988.

Page 606

William L. Touchette, Appellate Div., Lake Superior Court by Marce Gonzalez, Jr., Crown Point, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Amy Schaeffer Good, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

DICKSON, Justice.

Defendant Jessie E. Robinson was convicted of attempted murder following a jury trial. In this direct appeal he claims that the trial court erred in granting the State's motion in limine, and that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. We affirm.

After the jury was impanelled, but out of its presence, the State orally moved in limine to exclude "reference to the fact that the alleged victim in this cause was hospitalized for a drug overdose a few weeks prior to the incident." Defendant contends that the trial court committed error in granting the motion. He claims that the evidence was relevant to the victim's credibility and perceptive ability. Conceding that the claimed error was not preserved in the motion to correct errors, defendant contends that waiver is not applicable and argues that fundamental error resulted from the denial of his right to confrontation on this point. Defendant does not identify, nor do we find, any offer of proof during trial. In general, error cannot be predicated upon the granting of a motion in limine absent an offer to prove.

Moreover, the granting of the motion in limine did not constitute error, fundamental or otherwise. Criminal conduct which does not result in a conviction is generally inadmissible for purposes of impeachment. Jarvis v. State (1982), Ind., 441 N.E.2d 1; Chambers v. State (1979), 271 Ind. 357, 392 N.E.2d 1156. In addition, we are not persuaded that the omitted evidence was relevant for any other purpose. The questioned hospitalization occurred several weeks before the charged offense, and defendant does not present other evidence in the record demonstrating that the prior overdose or hospitalization may have affected the victim's perception at the time of the incident. The trial court permitted defendant to fully examine the victim regarding her drug activity on the day she was shot and the effects upon her perceptive abilities.

Defendant next contends that the evidence is insufficient. In addressing this question we will affirm if, considering only...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Robinson v. State, No. 45S03-0307-PC-314.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 10, 2004
    ...the defendant, Jesse E. Robinson, was sentenced to a term of thirty years. The judgment was affirmed on direct appeal. Robinson v. State, 525 N.E.2d 605 (Ind.1988). In 1989 the defendant filed a pro se petition for post conviction relief (PCR) and thereafter requested and received waiver of......
  • Williams v. State, No. 49A02-9412-CR-763
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • July 2, 1996
    ...cocaine the night of the attack and challenged the accuracy of her memory. These facts are akin to those presented in Robinson v. State, 525 N.E.2d 605 (Ind.1988). There, the trial court granted the State's motion in limine to exclude evidence that the victim was hospitalized for a drug ove......
2 cases
  • Robinson v. State, No. 45S03-0307-PC-314.
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • March 10, 2004
    ...the defendant, Jesse E. Robinson, was sentenced to a term of thirty years. The judgment was affirmed on direct appeal. Robinson v. State, 525 N.E.2d 605 (Ind.1988). In 1989 the defendant filed a pro se petition for post conviction relief (PCR) and thereafter requested and received waiver of......
  • Williams v. State, No. 49A02-9412-CR-763
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • July 2, 1996
    ...cocaine the night of the attack and challenged the accuracy of her memory. These facts are akin to those presented in Robinson v. State, 525 N.E.2d 605 (Ind.1988). There, the trial court granted the State's motion in limine to exclude evidence that the victim was hospitalized for a drug ove......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT