Holds under the facts in this case that “a 911 recording that involves statements by a caller that were relayed from a victim [were] admissible where the victim had personal knowledge of the underlying incident but the caller did not,” on the basis that the caller’s frame of mind and lack of opportunity to reflect qualified her 911 statements as excited utterances.
Sisson v. State, No. 09A02-1102-CR-199, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 5, 2012).
Presumption of prosecutorial vindictiveness was not shown when State refiled recidivist allegations for the retrial after the court had declared a mistrial because the jury could not reach a verdict.
In re Resnover, No. 49A02-1205-MI-364, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 5, 2012).
In an action for a name change, “a petitioner must submit with the petition for a name change the documents requested in I.C. § 34-28-2-2.5—including a driver’s license number or identification card number—if applicable…. [A]lthough we have decided that the language of subsection 2.5 does not carry a mandate, but rather a directory intent, the trial court is still obliged to discern the absence of a fraudulent purpose prior to granting a petitioner’s name change.”
C.A.B. v. J.D.M., No. 37A03-1204-AD-149, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 30, 2012).
Mother was denied due process when her children were allowed to be adopted while the appeal of her termination of parental rights was pending.
Thomas v. State, No. 64A03-1204-PL-191, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 28, 2012).
Ten year statute of limitations applies to habitual traffic violator suspensions; three-year delay in imposition of habitual traffic offender suspension was not shown to be subject to “extreme unfairness” basis for applying laches to bar an administrative regulatory sanction.