Larry Cade v. State Indiana

The Appellant, Larry Cade, has filed a petition for rehearing which asserts that our original opinion [264 Ind. 569] contained two misstatements of the facts. In fairness to the Appellant, we now look to these claims of factual error. 1. The Appellant cites as the first misstatement the following: Latent fingerprints identified as those of the Appellant, Adams, and Banks were found in the home. The Appellant contends that there is no evidence to this effect in the record, though he concedes that a palm print was found along the wall immediately inside the door jamb. The Appellee's brief goes into great detail about fingerprints and directs our attention to testimony in the record that a latent fingerprint of the Appellant was found on a kitchen wall of the Hosmer residence. Another fingerprint of the Appellant was found on the outside of the kitchen door. The Appellant accepted the State's statement of the facts in his reply brief. Our review of the record reveals that there was no misstatement of the facts here in our opinion.