2010 amendment of statute on required methods for blood draws to test for intoxication is remedial, so the amendment, as an evidence rule, applied to the method used to draw Boston’s blood in his OWI prosecution, when the amendment was enacted after the blood test but took effect prior to the trial.
Raisor v. Carter, No. 49A05-1010-CT-629, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 8, 2011)
If TR 15(C)’s requirements are met within the statute of limitations, then the last date to file an amended complaint would be 120 days after the statute of limitations has expired.
D.G. v. State, No. 49A04-1006-JV-416, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 13, 2011)
Since there was no recording of the sidebar conference at which defense counsel assertedly objected to alleged molesting victim’s competence to testify, and the parties could not agree as to what was said in the conference, defense counsel was assumed to have made the objection, and the failure of the trial court or of prosecuting counsel to then question the witness and assess her competence required reversal of the delinquency finding.
Mitchell v. State, No. 49A02-1003-CR-340, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 6, 2011)
Traditional rule that a post-conviction court may not take judicial of the transcript in the original proceedings appears to have been ended by the 2010 amendment to Evidence Rule 201(b)(5) allowing judicial notice of “records of a court of this state,” but since petitioner did not request judicial notice and court did not sua sponte take it the transcript was not in evidence in the post-conviction proceeding.
Dawson v. State, No. 49S02-1103-CR-176, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., March 29, 2011)
P-C.R. 2 does not allow belated appeals from orders revoking probation.