The trial court abused its discretion when it permitted the State to amend the information two business days before the start of the trial as it did not give defendant a reasonable opportunity to prepare for and defend against the new counts.
Criminal
Core v. State, No. 91A02-1611-PC-2604, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 24, 2019).
PCR Rule 2(1) allows an eligible defendant to appeal from a conviction or sentence after the time for filing an appeal has expired, but does not permit a belated appeal from a post-conviction or other post-judgment proceeding.
Artigas v. State, No. 18A-CR-2877, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 26, 2019).
To convict a person of operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent to at least .08 but less than .15 g/100mL of blood, only the scientific measurement in the lab report is relevant and not evidence of visible intoxication. A blood test that presented only a range from .07 to .084 g/100mL is insufficient to support a conviction.
Siebenaler v. State, No. 18A-CR-1381, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 26, 2019).
Court affirmed defendant’s convictions of child pornography and child exploitation where the images depicted sexual conduct, but reversed convictions where mere nudity was involved.
Wert v. State, No. 19A-CR-92, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 11, 2019).
It is clear from the trial court’s comments at the sentencing hearing that it understood the terms of the plea agreement but made a mistake in its written sentencing order and should issue a new order.