Even if a search warrant has been issued, forcing a person to unlock, and therefore disclose that contents of their cellphone, violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Criminal
Gulzar v. State, No. 19S-XP-673, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 24, 2020).
Amended expungement statute, which clarifies that the “date of conviction” for a felony reduced to a misdemeanor is the date of the felony conviction, applies retroactively.
Giden v. State, No. 19A-CR-2891, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 24, 2020).
The escape statute does not violate the Proportionality Clause of the Indiana Constitution.
Gammons v. State, No. 20S-CR-22, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 26, 2020).
Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 10.0300 dilutes the causal standard for self-defense; the instructional error was not harmless and case was remanded for a new trial.
State v. Ryder, No. 20S-CR-435, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2020).
Blood-draw search warrant application satisfied the filing requirement under Ind. Code § 35-33-5-2(a) because the signing judge’s uncontroverted certification that an affidavit had been delivered to her at the time of the warrant’s authorization established that the filing requirement had been satisfied.