concurring in result.
I concur in the result reached by the majority. However, I write separately because I disagree with the majority's treatment of Lawrence v. State, 665 N.E.2d 589 (Ind.Ct.App.1996), trams. denied. By merely distinguishing Lawrence from the facts of this case the majority implicitly agrees with its validity. I do not. See Id. (Rucker, J. dissenting). Rather than distinguish the case, I would decline to follow it.