The current version of the habitual offender statute allows a court to use that enhancement to a conviction of operating a motor vehicle after forfeiture for life even though that is a progressive penalty.
Ind. Family & Social Svcs. Admin. v. Patterson, No. 18A-PL-925, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 17, 2019).
Ind. Family & Social Svcs. Administration properly determined that the garnished portion of Medicaid recipient’s income should be included when determining his portion of the cost of his care.
Buddy & Pals III, Inc. v. Falaschetti, No. 18A-CT-1811, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 18, 2019).
Summary judgment was properly denied because the court found that the bar failed to establish as a matter of law that it did not owe patron a duty to protect him from another patron’s criminal act.
J.W. v. State, No. 19S-JV-12, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 9, 2019).
A juvenile who challenges the validity of a consent judgment must first seek relief from the trial court under Trial Rule 60(B) and is entitled to legal representation in doing so.
State v. Bouye, No. 18A-CR-1730, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 10, 2019).
Police officer properly conducted an IDACS search to establish a reasonable suspicion that the driver was operating a vehicle with an improper license plate, and whether there was actually a violation is irrelevant to the constitutionality of the stop.