Printing of store’s name “H & M” on security tags and store labels was not hearsay under Evidence Rule 801(c) because it was “not capable of being true or not true.”
Lovold v. Ellis, No. 54A01-1209-DR-410, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 26, 2013).
Living expenses for a child living on campus should not be included in the child support order when the child has repudiated the parent and the parent is not required to contribute to the child’s post-secondary education.
Guilmette v. State, No. 71A04-1205-CR-250, __ N.E.2 __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 22, 2013).
When authorities have taken an inmate’s clothing for inventory and safekeeping while he awaits trial, the Indiana Constitution requires that they must obtain a warrant to test the clothing regarding an unrelated, uncharged crime.
Erkins v. State, No. 58A01-1205-CR-215, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. Ap., Apr. 23, 2013).
The State may obtain a conviction of Class A conspiracy to commit robbery with proof that the conspirators intended to cause serious bodily injury in committing the robbery.
Robinson v. State, No. 20A04-1209-CR-561, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 23, 2013).
Brief contact twice with the fog line on a curvy road at night did not confer reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop.