Post-Conviction Rule 2 applies only to belated appeals of convictions or sentences and accordingly does not allow a belated appeal of a probation revocation.
Deloney v. State, No. 22A01-0906-CR-273, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 2010)
DNA evidence is not sufficiently relevant to be admissible when the defendant “could not be excluded from a possibly infinite number of people matching the crime-scene DNA and the DNA expert cannot offer a statistical probability whether the crime scene DNA came from the defendant.”
State v. West, No. 45A03-1003-PC-213, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2010)
When the trial transcript was not completed by the date of the P-C.R. hearing, the P-C.R. court did not err in admitting the “then-unavailable transcript” into evidence, with the consent of State and the petitioner, at the hearing in anticipation of its being admitted after completion.
Galloway v. State, No. 33S01-1004-CR-163, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Dec. 22, 2010)
Reverses bench trial rejection of insanity defense because, despite “nonconflicting expert and lay opinion that defendant . . .was insane, the trial court rejected the insanity defense after concluding that the defendant could continue to be a danger to society because of an inadequate State mental health system.”
Belmares-Bautista v. State, No. 57A04-1003-CR-223, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 22, 2010)
When defendant made no claim that Spanish language documents he read erroneously translated a standard advisement of the right to counsel or that he did not understand the advice, he failed to show his waiver of counsel was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.