concurring.
I join the Court’s opinion which addresses only the issue of harmless error,1 and which, it seems to me, is limited to the facts of this case. The Court has not addressed the issue of whether there was error. This was prudent. For one thing, a decision of that issue would not affect the judgment in this case.
For another, the appellant conceded in this court a very important point that was presented in this case: whether the law requires the State to read everything in this indictment.2 I join the court’s opinion with the understanding that this point remains undecided.
. "We now determine that the Court of Appeals was correct in declaring that, if there was error, it was harmless.” Ante, at 391.
. See Ante, at 395.