Defense counsel’s representation of key prosecution witness on unrelated pending charges created a prima facie case of actual conflict and resulted in counsel’s failure to cross-examine the witness on the charges, resulting in ineffective assistance.
Criminal
Shotts v. State, No. 71S03-0905-CR-253, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Apr. 15, 2010)
Suppression of evidence found during Indiana warrantless extradition arrest erroneously focused on flaws in Alabama magistrate’s probable cause determination, when correct inquiry was whether Indiana officers’ reliance on the report of Alabama warrant was reasonable.
Barnes v. State, No. 82A05-0910-CR-592, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 15, 2010)
Evidence required court to have instructed on defendant’s right to reasonably resist officer’s unlawful entry into defendant’s home.
Killebrew v. State, No. 49A05-0905-CR-246, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 6, 2010)
Defendant established prosecutor’s neutral explanations for peremptory strike were pretextual and hence violated Batson rule when white jurors were not struck after giving answers the same as struck African-American’s and trial judge made no finding on prosecutor’s assertion about struck juror’s “emphatic” demeanor.
Beattie v. State, No. 82S01-0907-CR-307, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Apr. 8, 2010)
Inconsistent verdicts in criminal cases are permissible and are not subject to judicial review.