Credit time for being in a drug court program with electronic monitoring is not required, but can be awarded in the court’s discretion.
Dixon v. State, No. 84A01-1307-CR-339, __ N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., July 22, 2014).
Terry pat-down search could not be conducted under the facts of the case.
Montgomery v. State, No. 82A05-1401-CR-34, __ n.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 23, 2014).
As statute requires a sex offender who moves to report to both the county he is leaving and the county he is moving to, defendant’s convictions for failing to register as a sex or violent offender in both counties were not barred either by statute or double jeopardy principles.
Fischer v. Heymann, No. 49S02-1309-PL-620, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 17, 2014).
Responding to the plaintiff’s demand was not the defendant’s only option to mitigate damages, but the trial court was within its discretion to reduce damages.
Camoplast Crocker, LLC v. Magic Circle Corp., No. 29S02-1407-CT-476, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 21, 2014).
Plaintiff’s amendment of the complaint was proper when it was filed before the two-year limitation period expired, even though the court granted the motion to amend after the limitation period expired.