id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
inlawrev-18076	Schumm, Joel M.	Recent Developments in Indiana Criminal Law and Procedure	2013	36	.pdf	application/pdf	16438	987	64	Id. at 59-60. 2013] CRIMINAL LAW 1057 when the trial court instructed the jury on accomplice liability, without re-reading the entire set of final instructions, it not only placed special significance on the particular issue of [the defendant’s] culpability with regard to the charge of robbery, but also the lone, additional instruction suggests a resolution to the jury’s predicament evidenced by their note.222 Although the court of appeals acknowledged recent supreme court authority explaining that “trial courts have greater leeway to facilitate and assist jurors in the deliberative process” as part of the relatively recent adoption of jury rules, the court concluded that leeway does not permit courts to subject defendants to the prejudice of mid-deliberation special instructions.223 The court appeared to suggest that trial courts could avoid reversible error by re-reading all the instruction and inserting the additional instruction in a “natural and logical position amongst the other [previously read] instructions. The court of appeals reiterated the statutory factors “relevant to the risk of nonappearance” that trial courts must consider in setting bail.59	cache/inlawrev-18076.pdf	txt/inlawrev-18076.txt