Defendant who pled guilty after a day of trial failed at his post-conviction hearing to prove that counsel’s failure to file a motion to suppress satisfied the prejudice prong of the ineffective assistance test; assuming for analysis that the motion to suppress would have been granted, defendant still had to prove prejudice in the P-C.R. 1 hearing by showing that the state would not have had sufficient evidence to convict him had trial continued.
Criminal
Lucio v. State, No. 29S00-0901-CR-1, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., June 23, 2009)
Prompt admonition to jury to disregard lay witness’s statement in violation of motion in limine “though you have never heard of it,” together with other circumstances of the trial, avoided need for mistrial.
Gonzalez v. State, No. 82A01-0809-CR-406, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2009)
Gonzalez v. State (Ind. Ct. App., May, J.)-When trial judge took plea agreement under advisement to allow the school which owned the bus defendant hit to decide whether to object, defendant’s letter to the school apologizing was a plea negotiation statement privileged under Evidence Rule 410 and its admission in evidence was reversible error.
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, No. 07-591, __ U.S. __ (June 25, 2009)
Admission of government lab technicians’ sworn “certificates of analysis” that substance taken from defendant was cocaine violated defendant’s Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause right; the certificates were “affidavits” and within the “core class of testimonial statements” defined in Crawford v. Washington.
Farris v. State, No. 02S03-0904-PC-181, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., June 17, 2009)
Consecutive habitual offender sentences are not authorized when related charges are tried in separate causes.