Applies U.S. Supreme Court ruling that police may not pat down a vehicle passenger during a routine traffic stop unless they reasonably believe he is armed and dangerous.
Walters v. Austin, No. 20A04-1106-CT-342,___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 18, 2012).
The amended motion to correct error was a repetitive motion and so the filing of the amended motion did not change the date for filing the notice of appeal.
Minnick v. State, No. 47A05-1108-CR-448,___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 3, 2012).
Under the circumstances of the case, the 25 year delay in sentencing did not violate defendant’s right to speedy sentencing.
Webster v. Walgreen, Co. No. 55A01-1110-CT-442, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 4, 2012).
“’[M]ailing’ for purposes of the Indiana Trial Rules requires the sender to affix sufficient postage.”
Gagan v. Yast, No. 45A05-1107-CT-377, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 5, 2012).
Attorney’s alleged defamatory statements made against his former clients were protected on the grounds of qualified privilege.