“Where recovery is limited to damages for increased risk of harm because the patient stood less than a 50% chance of recovery prior to encountering the physician’s negligence, the trial court may consider evidence of the patient’s underlying risk in order to determine the appropriate amount of damages.”
Jimerson v. State, No. 52A02-1510-CR-1538, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2016).
“Where a jury is able to apply concepts without further assistance, highlighting individual exchanges or vouching for the truth or falsity of particular evidence is invasive.”
Clippinger v. State, No. 71S00-1501-LW-950 , __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 28, 2016).
The legislature intended a sentence of life imprisonment without possibility of parole to fit within the definition of a “term of imprisonment” and when imposing such a sentence the trial court must make certain specific findings.
State v. Cassady, No. 17A03-1512-CR-2090, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2016).
Law enforcement officer’s actions were conducted in a manner that did not prolong the stop beyond the time reasonably required to complete the mission of issuing a ticket, and support the denial of a motion to suppress.
Hurley v. State, No. 49A05-1601-CR-108, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2016).
Defendant’s inability to give a sufficient sample on a chemical breath test after being suspected of driving under the influence was a refusal to take the test.