Admission of DNA test results without testimony of technician who performed DNA test procedures but with testimony of lab supervisor who reviewed the specific results and of expert who prepared paternity analysis satisfied defendant’s federal Crawford Confrontation Clause right.
League of Women Voters of Indiana, Inc. v. Rokita, No. 49A02-0901-CV-40, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 17, 2009)
Indiana’s Voter I.D. law violates the equal privileges and immunities clause of the Indiana Constitution.
Slone v. State, No. 57A03-0904-CR-162, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 9, 2009)
Evidence that defendant bought two twenty-count packages of pseudoephedrine within one week during cold season was insufficient to prove defendant knowingly purchased drugs containing more than three grams of ephedrine within one week.
In re Adoption of A.S., D.S., C.S., & J.S., No. 49A02-0901-CV-60, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2009)
Where parents executed consents for one person to adopt their children, then (without withdrawing the first consents) executed subsequent consents for two other people to adopt their children, neither Indiana’s adoption statutes nor public policy prohibits the subsequent consents.
Baker v. Taylor, No. 18A04-0812-CV-746, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2009)
Where an account is established by an attorney-in-fact using entirely the funds of a principal, the attorney-in-fact is named joint owner or POD beneficiary, and the principal has no direct involvement in, or even awareness of, the creation of the account, the survivor cannot be presumed the owner of the accounts.