A trial court possesses the authority to instruct the jury on the penal consequences of a not responsible by reason of insanity verdict, and a guilty but mentally ill verdict, on its own accord to instruct on what it perceives to be a confused jury.
Jones v. State, No. 24A-CR-1102, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 14, 2025).
The right to counsel under Article 1, Section 13 attaches at the point of arrest by an Indiana official.
Tillett v. State, No. 24A-CR-1413, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 28, 2025).
A defendant, charged with a felony, must file a notice of intent to raise an insanity defense no later than 20 days before omnibus date. However, in the interest of justice and upon a showing of good cause, a trial court may permit the filing to be made at any time before commencement of the trial.
Nardi v. King, No. 25S-PL-64, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 18, 2025).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding plaintiff “substantially” prevailed in his APRA suit by obtaining a wrongfully withheld public record, even though he received only a portion of all requested records. A plaintiff who has substantially prevailed can recover attorney’s fees for time spent on unsuccessful claims if it is indivisible from the time spent on the successful claim.
Hoagland Family Ltd. Partnership v. Town of Clear Lake, No. 25S-PL-66, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 18, 2025).
Trial court’s dismissal under TR 12(B)(8) should have been a dismissal without prejudice. A dismissal with prejudice is conclusive of the rights of the parties and is res judicata as to any questions that might have been litigated.