This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

On October 27, 1993, Patricia and Kris Shank, who lived together, went to D's house. D quickly recruited Patricia, Shank and Anna Eason to rob 71-year-old Hillard Doss. After about fifteen minutes of planning, D drove Shank and Eason to the scene of the robbery. Patricia was a passenger in d's truck at the time. d and Patricia waited in the truck while Shank and Eason went to commit the crime. At first, the pair returned to the truck without having carried out the plan, but after encouragement from D, they went back to Doss's home, again gained entrance, committed the robbery, and returned to D's truck for their get-away. Patricia and Eason testified against D. Shank's testimony from a prior writ hearing was also introduced against D. The jury was instructed that Shank and Eason were accomplices as a matter of law. the only testimony linking D to the crime, except Patricia's, came from accomplices. A conviction cannot be had on uncorroborated accomplice testimony, and the only evidence corroborating D and Shank's testimony came from Patricia. If Patricia was an accomplice, there would be no corroborating evidence upon which a conviction, in this case, could be upheld against a sufficiency challenge.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.