The search of a vehicle in defendant’s garage did not unconstitutionally exceed the scope of the search warrant under the Fourth Amendment. A search warrant authorizing a search of a particularly described premises permits the search of vehicles owned or controlled by the owner of, and found on, the premises.
Criminal
Hummel v. State, No. 75A03-1710-PC-2449, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 6, 2018).
A PCR court has the authority to accept agreements that modify the sentence in the underlying criminal case, whether that judge is an elected judge, a judge pro tempore, or a special judge. Once accepted, the State is bound by the terms of that agreement
Schmitt v. State, No. 83A04-1711-CR-2720, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 10, 2018
Courts are no longer statutorily required to have prosecutorial consent to modify a sentence, but if it makes a preliminary determination that it would grant a petition to modify it should request documentation from the DOC and hold a hearing on the petition.
Healey v. Carter, No. 76A03-1711-MI-2681, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 21, 2018).
Trial court retained subject-matter jurisdiction to resolve defendant’s constitutional claim against the Department of Correction requiring him to register as a sex offender.
Seo v. State, No. 29A05-1710-CR-2466, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 21, 2018).
Compelling defendant to unlock her iPhone, under the threat of contempt and imprisonment, is constitutionally prohibited by the Fifth Amendment because revealing or using the passcode to do so is a testimonial act. The State must describe with reasonable particularity the information it seeks to compel defendant to produce and why.