Evidence was insufficient to prove element of “forcibly” resisting law enforcement; suggests legislative scrutiny of distinction between law enforcement officer and school-discipline officer for purposes of resisting law enforcement offense.
Criminal
Sickels v. State, No. 20S03-1206-CR-308, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Feb. 22, 2013).
“[A] custodial parent may be a ‘victim’ for purposes of restitution based on a child-support arrearage even if the children have been emancipated.”
Brock v. State, No. 79A04-1208-CR-433, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).
Consecutivity for intimidation sentence enhanced with habitual offender status and for “progressive penalty statute” enhanced second-conviction auto theft did not violate the prohibition of “double enhancement” when the enhancements were not based on the same prior felony conviction.
Sparks v. State, No. 49A02-1207-CR-593, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).
When probationer heard judge say judge was inclined to impose a four year sentence if probationer admitted the violation and probationer then admitted, court’s imposition of a five year sentence without a hearing on the violation was fundamental error.
Carrillo v. State, No. 49A02-1112-PC-1209, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 18, 2013).
Suggests the trial court judge may play a role in having defense counsel advise defendant of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea, in holding that it was not ineffective assistance in 2006 for counsel to fail to determine whether defendant was not a citizen.