Forensic interviewer’s testimony vouching for child victims’ testimony, admitted over defendant’s timely objection, was reversible error. But detective calling children’s statements “powerful” when interrogating defendant was not error because it was meant only to elicit response from defendant, not as assertion of fact.
Criminal
R.B. v. State, No. 49A02-1502-JV-96, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 11, 2015).
Under the Fourth Amendment, police could reasonably rely on minor’s mother’s consent to search minor’s bedroom in her home.
Caldwell v. State, No. 22A01-1411-CR-479, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 31, 2015).
In prosecution for burglary and attempted rape, Defendant’s alleged “peeping” at another home in the same neighborhood 56 days later was inadmissible because it was not “strikingly similar” to the charged offense; but conclusive DNA evidence rendered the error harmless.
Gibson v. State, No. 39S05-1509-CR-517, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 31, 2015).
Pulling the victim to the ground during the course of a battery was insufficient to establish D-felony criminal confinement by removal under I.C. § 35-42-3-3(a)(2).
Ryan v. State, No. 49A02-1501-CR-2, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 26, 2015).
Under Ind. Code § 35-33-9-5(c) and App. R. 18, defendants cannot earn credit time while released on appeal bond, regardless of allegedly onerous nature of bond conditions; instead, reasonableness of conditions must be challenged immediately by motion to reconsider or appeal under App. R. 18.