“Source of physical evidence” exception to Evidence Rule 412 (rape shield) does not apply when State presents no physical evidence for Defendant to rebut. Excluding evidence did not prevent defendant from describing his version of events and cross-examining witnesses accordingly. Bailiff’s communication with jury was clearly improper, but harmless. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the jury heard no extraneous information, based on weighing conflicting accounts of events in deliberations.
Criminal
Whitely v. State, No. 49A02-1501-CR-50, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. Dec. 7, 2015).
Inventory search of vehicle was not unreasonable despite officers’ significant deviation from written department policy for such searches; breach of policy, without more, did not show that the inventory was pretext for an investigatory search.
Lewis v. State, No. 49A02-1504-CR-193, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2015).
Fleeing from police by auto, then by foot, was one continuous act of fleeing and therefore, under federal double jeopardy principles, could support only one conviction for resisting law enforcement.
Hilligoss v. State, No. 34A02-1506-CR-529, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 18, 2015).
Failing to advise defendant of constitutional rights before accepting his admission to violating probation is a fundamental violation of due process, requiring remand for new revocation hearing. Extensions of probation for previous violations exceeded one additional year in violation of I.C. § 35-38-2-3(h)(2).
Causey v. State, No. 49A02-1503-CR-185, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 20, 2015).
Telling police officers, “If you come any closer I’ll shoot,” was conditional and aimed at officers’ future, not past, conduct; it therefore did not threaten retaliation for their prior lawful act of responding to a domestic-disturbance report, and could not support intimidation conviction.