Conviction for aiding in the dealing of a narcotic drug was reversed because agent’s testimony was too speculative to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she packaged the drug sold.
Criminal
Risinger v. State, No. 19A-CR-281, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 9, 2019).
Defendant’s statement, “I’m done talking,” was an unequivocal invocation of his right to remain silent pursuant to Miranda, and the detectives’ continuation of questioning thereafter was a failure to honor that right.
Peele v. State, No. 19A-CR-1160, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 20, 2019).
Trial court erred in granting state’s continuance motion filed thirteen days before the speedy trial date, which was the same day it requested lab test results from the State Police Laboratory.
Girten v. State, No. 18A-CR-2252, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 21, 2019).
Defendant’s conviction for strangulation committed while engaging in a rape for which he was also convicted should have been vacated under the actual evidence test on double jeopardy grounds instead of the continuous crime doctrine.
J.S. v. State, No. 19A-CR-733, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 13, 2019).
Where defendant filed a motion for indigent counsel but failed to appear at a hearing to consider that motion, trial court improperly denied his motion and required that he proceed pro se without giving sufficient warning about the perils of self-representation, and by not inquiring as to his indigency.