ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Michael E. Caudill Karen M. Freeman-Wilson
Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Adam M. Dulik
Deputy Attorney General
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
MELISSA SKINNER, ) ) Appellant (Defendant Below ), ) ) v. ) ) 49S05-0010-CR-592 STATE OF INDIANA, ) in the Supreme Court ) Appellee (Plaintiff Below ). )
BRANDON COCKRELL, )
Appellant (Defendant Below), ) in the Court of Appeals
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Appellee (Plaintiff Below). )
October 20, 2000
Appellants assert that the allegations against them also fall under the statute that
criminalizes check fraud, Ind. Code Ann. § 35-43-5-12(b) (West 1998). Relying on
State v. Wynne, 699 N.E.2d 717 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998), they contend that
the State may charge them only with check fraud, the check fraud statute
being both more specific and more recently adopted. The net result of
accepting this contention would be reducing the class of felony and therefore the
The Court of Appeals in this appeal declined to follow
it held that when two criminal statutes overlap such that either may cover
a given set of facts, the prosecutor has the discretion to charge under
either statute. Skinner v. State 732 N.E.2d 235 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
We grant transfer and summarily affirm the opinion of the Court of Appeals
in these consolidated cases. Ind. Appellate Rule 11(B)(3). The decision in
State v. Wynne is disapproved.
The judgments of the trial court are thus affirmed.
Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.