The Fourth Amendment rule allowing occupants of premises to be temporarily seized while a warrant is executed is limited to persons “in the immediate vicinity” of the premises to be searched.
Criminal
Hawkins v. State, No. 20S03-1208-CR-499, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 19, 2013).
On the facts of this case, defendant’s failure to appear at his trial in absentia did not constitute a waiver of his right to counsel. And, “a trial court may conduct a sentencing hearing at which the defendant appears by video, but only after obtaining a written waiver of his right to be present and the consent of the prosecution.”
Chaidez v. United States, No. 11–820, __ U.S. __ (Feb. 20, 2013).
The Padilla v. Kentucky Sixth Amendment holding, requiring defense counsel to advise of risk of deportation entailed in a guilty plea, does not have retroactive application to convictions which became final prior to Padilla’s decision date (which was March 31, 2010).
Evans v. Michigan, No. 11-1327, __ U.S. __ (Feb. 20, 2013).
A directed verdict of acquittal based on failure to prove an “element” which the trial court erroneously thought was part of the charge was an acquittal for Fifth Amendment double jeopardy purposes.
Jennings v. State, No. 53S01-1209-CR-526, __N.E.2d __ (Ind., Feb. 20, 2013).
“[T]he combined term of imprisonment and probation for a misdemeanor may not exceed one year,” so “[w]e therefore remand this case to the trial court for imposition of a probationary period consistent with this opinion, not to exceed 335 days—the difference between one year (365 days) and the 30 days Jennings was ordered to serve in prison.”