In a CHINS case, the testimony of three physicians that child’s injuries were non-accidental and indicative of child abuse, plus establishing that time of his birth until his removal child was continuously in his parents’ care, established the elements of the Presumption Statute in order to shift the burden of production to the parents.
Dvorak v. State, No. 53A01-1604-CR-923, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2017).
In order to toll the statute of limitations in a criminal case, an individual must perform a “positive act” to conceal the fact that an offense has been committed.
Gonzalez v. State, No. 33A04-1612-MI-2807, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 19, 2017).
Forfeiture order was reversed when the trial court inferred from defendant’s presence in the vehicle that he was a co-conspirator with the other passengers for dealing in narcotics when there was no additional evidence of a nexus between defendant’s forfeited money and dealing in narcotics.
Pinner v. State, No. 49S02-1611-CR-610, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 9, 2017).
Police need more than a tip that someone is carrying a handgun to conduct a lawful search and seizure; there must be evidence from which an inference of criminal activity can be drawn.
Phipps v. State, No. 28A05-1609-CR-2097, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 10, 2017).
To convict a person of violating a protective order, State must prove that communication with a third party was intended to be communicated to the protected party.