“[D]efendant’s acknowledgement he is on probation, without more,” does not “’open the door’ to extensive and potentially-damaging character evidence about the nature of his prior offenses or the length of his prior sentences.”
Neukam v. State, No. 16A01-1002-CR-50, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2010)
Single photo show-up to witness who had already named and identified suspect was not unduly suggestive.
State v. Renzulli, No. 32A04-1003-CR-194, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2010)
One of three separate opinions in plurality decision would hold State had to corroborate citizen tip with testimony that officers saw no other vehicles besides defendant’s which matched the tipster’s description.
Bingley v. Bingley, No. 02S03-1002-CV-122, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Sept. 30, 2010)
“[E]mployer-provided health insurance benefits do constitute an asset [subject to division in a dissolution] once they have vested in a party to the marriage.”
Capital Drywall Supply, Inc. v. Jai Jagdish, Inc., No. 71A03-1004-PL-189, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 29, 2010)
“[A] mechanic’s lien claimant does not have a right to rely on telephone hearsay to identify the property owner and does so at its own risk.”