Houseguest did not have authority to consent to police entry without a warrant and all evidence seized was inadmissible.
Criminal
Gomez v. State, No. 49A02-1511-CR-2000, __N.E.3d___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 8, 2016).
Acts of domestic battery were sufficiently compressed in terms of time, place, singleness of purpose, and continuity of action so as to constitute a single transaction for purposes of the continuous crime doctrine.
Sullivan v. State, 16A01-1512-CR-2175, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., July 8, 2016).
Trial court abused its discretion in finding that defendant’s violation warranted revoking his community corrections placement and in ordering him to serve eighteen months in jail.
Jimerson v. State, No. 52A02-1510-CR-1538, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2016).
“Where a jury is able to apply concepts without further assistance, highlighting individual exchanges or vouching for the truth or falsity of particular evidence is invasive.”
Clippinger v. State, No. 71S00-1501-LW-950 , __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 28, 2016).
The legislature intended a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole to fit within the definition of a “term of imprisonment” and when imposing such a sentence the trial court must make certain specific findings.