The State violated Indiana’s Double Jeopardy Clause when it brought two separate charges of dealing in synthetic drugs based solely upon the fact that the packets containing the spice bore different brand names.
B.T.E. v. State, No. 36S05-1711-JV-711, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 11, 2018).
The defendant’s planning, solicitations, bomb research, drawings depicting the target classroom, and death note together justify the trial court’s conclusion that his affirmative conduct amounts to a substantial step toward the commission of aggravated battery.
In re T.T. v. Ind. Dept. of Child Svcs., No. 18A-JC-1216, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 10, 2018).
Fact-finding hearings on CHINS petitions must be completed within 120 days of filing, regardless of any act or agreements of the parties involved.
Wamsley v. Tree City Village, No. 18S-CT-502, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 11, 2018).
Trial Rule 60(B)(1) only requires “slight evidence of excusable neglect” to set aside a default judgment.
M.D. v. State, No. 18S-CR-488, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Oct. 3, 2018).
A person in police custody is not entitled to advisement of rights under Pirtle prior to police obtaining consent to conduct a Drug Recognition Exam (“DRE”).