Inventory search of vehicle was not unreasonable despite officers’ significant deviation from written department policy for such searches; breach of policy, without more, did not show that the inventory was pretext for an investigatory search.
Schmidt v. Ind. Insurance Co., No. 22S01-1507-PL-412, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 2, 2015).
Even if the applicant was truthful and provided complete information regarding the property to the insurance agent, there is no genuine issue of fact regarding the proximate cause of loss because no dwelling fire insurance policy would have been issued on such information.
Wartell v. Lee, No. 02A03-1503-PL-81, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 7, 2015).
An allegedly defamatory statement related to a person’s trade, profession, office, or occupation is not defamatory per se, but the statement must impute a serious level of misconduct in a way that does not require reference to extrinsic facts for context.
Lewis v. State, No. 49A02-1504-CR-193, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 30, 2015).
Fleeing from police by auto, then by foot, was one continuous act of fleeing and therefore, under federal double jeopardy principles, could support only one conviction for resisting law enforcement.
Abernathy v. Gulden, No. 45A03-1503-MI-73, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 30, 2015).
Ind. Code § 9-30-10-4(e), requiring the BMV to use the dates of the offenses rather than the dates of the judgments in determining a person’s status as a HTV, is a procedural amendment which does not violate the ex post facto clauses of the Indiana and United States Constitutions.