Britt v. State (Ind. Ct. App., Mathias, J.)-When robbery defendant called his brother as a witness and did not attack the brother’s credibility, the brother’s prior robbery conviction was inadmissible character evidence.
Criminal
Segar v. State, No. 49A02-1003-CR-269, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 1, 2010)
Defendant did not waive his objection to the admission of the marijuana found on his person when he earlier made no objection to officers’ “foundational” testimony that material in his pocket “resembled” and “was believed to be” marijuana.
Kocielko v. State, No. 20A03-1002-CR-218, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 2, 2010)
Defendant convicted of both deviate sexual conduct and fondling has the fondling conviction reversed, under the rule that multiple convictions cannot be imposed for the “same injurious consequences sustained by the same victim during a single confrontation.”
Curtis v. State, No. 20A03-1002-CR-110, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2010)
“[A] person’s unfitness to operate a vehicle . . . is to be determined by considering his capability as a whole, not component by component, such that impairment of any of the three abilities necessary for the safe operation of a vehicle equals impairment within the meaning of I.C. § 9-30-5-2.”
Owens v. State, No. 29A02-1002-CR-390, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 23, 2010)
Policeman’s testimony that defendant had not called him, after the officer left his card on defendant’s door with a note asking defendant to call, did not violate defendant’s Fifth Amendment right.