Pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 4(B), a trial court may continue a trial upon taking note of a congestion or an emergency without the additional requirement of a local emergency.
Criminal
State v. Lyons, No. 21A-CR-2187, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 11, 2022).
Even in the criminal context, the purpose of Indiana’s discovery rules is to allow a liberal discovery procedure for the purpose of providing litigants with information essential to the litigation of all relevant issues, eliminate surprise, and to promote settlement. When a discovery rule is violated, a trial court has broad discretion to impose sanctions, which may include exclusion of all evidence that might have flowed from the violation.
Crowley v. State, No. 21A-MI-2064, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 16, 2022).
If another state previously subjected a pre-SORA offender to a registration requirement, requiring him to register in Indiana is not punitive. It is irrelevant where or when the conviction occurred, as long as another state imposed a lawful registration obligation on the offender and SORA does not so significantly alter that obligation to result in added punishment.
Strack v. State, No. 22S-CR-137, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 2, 2022).
At sentencing, a criminal defendant who enters an open guilty plea has a right to allocution distinct from the right to present evidence on his or her behalf.
Reyes v. State, No. 21A-CR-2646, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 6, 2022).
Because Indiana Jury Rule 26(a) affords trial courts the option to give final instructions before or after closing arguments, a court can do either without abusing its discretion.