Defendant’s PCR petition was not barred by the doctrine of laches because State failed to show prejudice; however, he was properly denied relief because the trial court was not required to advise him of collateral consequences of his guilty plea.
Criminal
W.R. v. State, No. 17A03-1703-XP-571, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 1, 2017).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to expunge drug-dealing convictions because petitioner’s job includes going into businesses and the nature of the convictions might be relevant to businesses deciding whether to exclude petitioner from their premises.
Morgan v. State, No. 84A01-1703-CR-587, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 1, 2017).
Ind. Code 35-38-2.6-5, which controls the community corrections program, does not impermissibly delegate judicial authority to the community corrections director; a hearing is required before direct placement in community corrections is revoked.
State v. Timbs, No. 27S04-1702-MI-70, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Nov. 2, 2017).
The Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause does not bar the State from forfeiting Defendant’s vehicle because the United States Supreme Court has not held that the Clause applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment.
WPTA-TV v. State, No. 35A02-1705-CR-1060, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 31, 2017).
Trial court properly granted a TV station’s request for a digitally recorded version of a publicly available court record while limiting its use of the audio record and barring its broadcast or dissemination.