“Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.”
Criminal
Wall v. State, No. 85A02-1311-MI-976, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 25, 2014).
Because petitioner’s probation had been revoked, his expungement petition was properly denied on the basis that he had not “successfully completed” his sentence.
Knapp v. State, No. 28S00-1305-LW-327,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 12, 2014).
Rejected defendant’s claims that crime scene photos and expert witness testimony were improperly admitted and that his sentence was not supported by evidence or was inappropriate in light of his character and the nature of his offense.
State v. Vanderkolk, No. 79A04-1308-CR-407, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 11, 2014).
Although defendant’s roommate waived his 4th Amendment right as a home detention participant, roommate did not completely waive his 4th Amendment right and the police could not conduct a suspicionless search of defendant’s room.
Brummett v. State, No. 49A02-1304-CR-378, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., June 2, 2014).
Prosecutorial misconduct amounted to fundamental error.