The “reasonable particularity” requirement under the Access to Public Records Act “enables the subpoenaed party to identify what is sought and enables the trial court to determine whether there has been sufficient compliance with the request.”
Curts v. Miller Health Systems, Inc., No. 09A02-1112-CT-1191, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 15, 2012).
“[N]urses can potentially have sufficient expertise to qualify as experts for the purposes of medical standards of care and medical causation.”
Gulzar v. State, No. 20A03-1202-PC-88, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2012).
Even assuming, had he been advised of deportation consequences, that defendant would not have pled guilty due to the “special circumstances” that deportation would have uprooted his family, the very strong evidence of his guilt made harmless counsel’s failure to advise him that his theft plea bargain would result in automatic deportation.
Dye v. State, No. 20S04-1201-CR-5, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., July 31, 2012).
Habitual offender enhancement may not be imposed on conviction of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.
Castillo v. State, No. 45S00-1102-LW-110, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., July 31, 2012).
When evidence showed defendant’s boyfriend killed her child and that she was an accomplice to the murder, the life without parole sentence for her was inappropriate; revises murder sentence to 65 years.