Since there was no recording of the sidebar conference at which defense counsel assertedly objected to alleged molesting victim’s competence to testify, and the parties could not agree as to what was said in the conference, defense counsel was assumed to have made the objection, and the failure of the trial court or of prosecuting counsel to then question the witness and assess her competence required reversal of the delinquency finding.
Juvenile
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of J.S.O., No. 64A05-1005-JT-304, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 7, 2010)
Failure of Child Services to provide father with notice of hearings and copies of all orders in the CHINS phase of proceedings, when Child Services knew father’s name and whereabouts, violated Due Process and required reversal of termination of father’s parental rights.
S.D. v. State, No. 49A02-1004-JV-442, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 29, 2010)
Juvenile waiver statute’s meaningful consultation requirement was not met when juvenile’s conversation with guardian was videotaped by police and juvenile and guardian knew it was being taped.
State v. J.S., No. 49A02-1004-JV-567, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 16, 2010)
Juvenile court did not err in dismissing delinquency petition after finding the juvenile defendant incompetent to stand trial.
D.C. v. State, No. 49A02-1002-JV-100, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 14, 2010)
Delinquency disposition statutes do not allow juvenile court to order both determinate and indeterminate commitments to DOC.