Amelioration doctrine did not apply to defendant’s sentence because the legislature clearly stated in Ind. Code 1-1-5.5-21(b) that it did not intend the amelioration doctrine to apply.
Criminal
Johnson v. United States, No. 13-7120, ___ U.S. ___ (June 26, 2015).
Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA)’s definition of “violent felony” is unconstitutionally vague as to its residual clause, which covers any felony that “involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another”; clause leaves uncertainty about how to estimate the risk posed by a crime or how much risk it takes for a crime to qualify as a violent felony. (Overruling James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (2007) and Sykes v. United States, 564 U.S. 1 (2011).)
Dada v. State, ___ N.E.3d ___, No. 53A01-1501-CR-33 (Ind. Ct. App. June 26, 2015).
Court erred in denying expungement to misdemeanant; she was entitled to expungement even though “she had been summonsed rather than arrested” for her offense.
Satterfield v. State, No. 63S00-1401-LW-306, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. June 26, 2015).
Court did not abuse its discretion in admitting officer’s lay-witness testimony that an allegedly mentally ill defendant was “evasive” during police questioning.
Smith v. State, ___ N.E.3d ___, No. 71S04-1506-CD-364 (Ind. June 26, 2015).
State did not violate Due Process by knowingly relying on perjured testimony, nor was testimony “incredibly dubious”; co-defendant’s trial testimony was not necessarily false nor internally contradictory, but merely inconsistent with factual basis for her guilty plea in prior proceedings.