Absent a knowing and voluntary waiver, Ind. Code § 35-38-1-4(a) requires that a defendant must be personally present at the time sentence is pronounced.
Criminal
Brook v. State, No. 22A-CR-2110, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 20, 2023).
When a defendant is charged with a crime elevated based upon a prior infraction, the trial court is not required to bifurcate the proceedings. Because Lorazepam’s status as a legend drug was not an issue of fact—it was identified in court by a name specifically designated as a controlled substance by the Indiana Code—the trial court did not erroneously invade the province of the jury by giving instructions that created a mandatory presumption indicating that the substance was classified as a legend drug.
T.D. v. State, No. 23S-JV-110, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 6, 2023).
When a court fails to confirm or secure a waiver as required by the Juvenile Waiver Statute, Trial Rule 60(B) is the appropriate avenue for a juvenile to challenge their agreed delinquency adjudication. Because the judgment is voidable, rather than void, when the Juvenile Waiver Statute is violated, Rule 60(B)(8) is the proper vehicle for a juvenile to collaterally attack their adjudication.
Davis v. State, No. 22S-CR-253, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 3, 2023)(opinion on rehearing).
When a defendant waives the right to pursue their sentence as part of a plea agreement, they may not pursue a direct appeal of their sentence even if they can prove they did not knowingly and voluntarily waive the right to do so. A defendant must seek to vacate their guilty plea in post-conviction relief.
Winans v. State, No. 23A-CR-80, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 26, 2023).
Where a defendant preserves their right to a jury trial, failure to object to a subsequently scheduled bench trial is insufficient to constitute waiver.