“[C]lass A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a BAC of at least .15 percent is not a lesser included offense of class C misdemeanor operating while intoxicated.”
Criminal
Estrada v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-474, __ N.E.2d__ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2012).
As two of Estrada’s string of five robberies were armed, and she was 16 when she committed them, they were not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the juvenile court in which she was adjudicated delinquent for the other three robberies, so even assuming the successive prosecution statute applies to delinquencies the two armed robberies were not offenses which “should have been charged” in the juvenile proceeding.
Harmon v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-529, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 28, 2012).
Evidence was insufficient to prove the weight of the manufactured methamphetamine was three grams or more, as required for A felony manufacturing.
Williams v. Illinois, No. 10-8505, __ U.S. __ (June 18, 2012).
Plurality opinion on whether Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce an analyst’s forensic report through an expert witness; plurality holds in this case Clause did not preclude an expert’s testimony that defendant’s DNA profile matched a vaginal swab semen DNA profile produced by a Cellmark analyst who did not testify.
Orr v. State, No. 45A03-1107-CR-308, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 18, 2012).
Evidence Rule 613(b) confers discretion to allow a prior inconsistent statement to be admitted before the witness has a chance to explain or deny or, in some circumstances, even when witness is not given any chance to explain or deny.