Barnes, J.
….
Until recently, the general rule in Indiana was that “a trial court may not take judicial notice even of its own records in another case previously before the court on a related subject with related parties.” Gray v. State, 871 N.E.2d 408, 413 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), trans. denied. However, effective January 1, 2010, Indiana Evidence Rule 201(b) was amended to provide that a court may take judicial notice of “records of a court of this state . . . .” Thus, the trial court here did not err in taking judicial notice of the CHINS proceedings at the outset of the TPR hearing.
….
TPR cases are similar to PCR cases in that they often must refer to and rely heavily upon records in different, but related, proceedings, i.e., a CHINS proceeding in a TPR case and an original criminal trial in a PCR case. In that respect, what we noted in Graham applies equally here, and in fact in any situation where a trial court takes judicial notice of records of another court proceeding in deciding a case. Evidence Rule 201(b) now allows trial courts to take judicial notice of records of other court proceedings, but if a court does so, there must be some effort made to include such “other” records in the record of the current proceeding. [Footnote omitted.] Furthermore, if a party on appeal wishes to rely on parts of the “other” record or records in making an argument before this court, it should include those parts in an appendix submitted to this court under Indiana Appellate Rule 50.
….
Affirmed.
FRIEDLANDER, J., and MAY, J., concur.