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
                            Indianapolis, Indiana




IN THE

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,                )
                            ) 49A05-9912-CR-529
    Appellant (Defendant Below),    ) in the Court of Appeals
                            )
)
)
STATE OF INDIANA,                )
                            )
    Appellee (Plaintiff Below).    )


APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Gary Miller, Presiding Judge
Cause No. 49G05-9905-CF-078437 (Skinner)
Cause No. 49G06-9905-CF-078436 (Cockrell)


October 20, 2000



SHEPARD, Chief Justice.

     The State charged appellants Melissa J. Skinner and Brandon H. Cockrell with defrauding a financial institution, Ind. Code Ann. § 35-43-5-8 (West 1998), in cases arising out of separate facts.

    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 potential penalty.

    The Court of Appeals in this appeal declined to follow Wynne. Instead, 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.