When a person has been simultaneously confined in connection with multiple causes and the court must impose consecutive sentences across those causes, Indiana law requires the trial court to (1) calculate credit time at the rate associated with the first sentence in the sequence of sentences and (2) allocate the time to that first sentence.
Criminal
Wells v. State, 21A-CR-612, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2021).
Exclusion from trial for failing a drug test is improper. In such instances, a trial court should apply, and exhaust, lesser contempt penalties, before imposing the extreme sanction of the deprivation of fundamental rights.
Ramirez v. State, 20S-LW-430, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 23, 2021).
The trial court properly exercised its discretion with the respect to the admission of evidence and providing a supplemental jury instruction. Moreover, the imposition of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole was not inappropriate.
Larkin v. State, 21S-CR-427, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sep. 14, 2021).
During a criminal trial, the prosecution can request a jury instruction on a lesser-included offense so long as the charging documents provide adequate notice and the record at trial reveals a serious evidentiary dispute.
Olympic Financial Group, Inc., v. State, 21A-CR-1017, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 17, 2021).
For the State to seize cash and seek its forfeiture—or turnover—it must show a nexus between the cash and some sort of criminal activity