A trial court has discretion to deny a defendant’s motion to replace counsel during or immediately before trial.
Stone v. State, No. 23A-CR-625, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 12, 2024).
Convictions based on the same subsection of the rape statute that are mutually exclusive criminal acts — forcible sexual intercourse and forcible other sexual conduct — do not violate double jeopardy.
Expert Pool Builders, LLC v. Vangundy, No. 23S‐PL‐171, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 2, 2024).
A party’s opposition to the motion for default judgment preserved its challenge for appeal and it was not required to also file a T.R. 60(B) motion.
Hoback v. State, No. 23A-CR-411, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2023).
Pursuant to C.R. 4, when docket entries are absent or missing regarding the reason for a delay, the delay is not chargeable to the defendant.
Murphy v. Cook, No. 23A-SC-1614, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2023).
Courts should be mindful of the provisions and requirements of T.R. 64(A) with respect to issuing a body attachment, including the provision that body attachments expire 180 days after issuance and the expiration date must appear on the face of the writ.