“Can I get a lawyer?” was an unequivocal request for an attorney under Miranda.
Jones v. State, No. 49A02-1109-CR-853, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2012).
Venue lay in county where victims resided when defendant violated the no-contact order by phoning them.
Lee v. State, No. 49A04-1105-CR-225, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2012).
State’s evidence did not show officers had a reasonable belief sex offense suspect would destroy DNA evidence on his body, so that there were no exigent circumstances permitting the police to obtain DNA swabs from the suspect without first getting a search warrant.
Otte v. State, No. 84A01-1108-CR-356, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2012).
Rejects argument that expert’s testimony that victims of domestic violence often recant their stories was improper vouching in violation of Evidence Rule 704(b).
Suarez v. State, No. 02A05-1106-PC-325, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 17, 2012).
Strength of case against him and magnitude of benefit he received from his plea bargain were primary factors supporting conclusion prisoner would have entered his guilty plea even had defense counsel properly advised him of the potential for deportation.