Dying stab victim’s response to question “who did this” from police officer trying to help staunch the wounds was not “testimonial” under Crawford doctrine and hence its admission did not violate defendant’s confrontation right.
State ex rel. Kirtz v. Delaware Circuit Court No. 5, No. 18S00-0909-OR-411, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Nov. 13, 2009)
When defendant had testified against special prosecutor’s brother-in-law in an unrelated recent case, the special prosecutor’s appointment was dissolved by a Supreme Court writ of mandate and prohibition based on the appearance of impropriety.
Nunley v. State, No. 31A01-0902-CR-88, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 16, 2009)
Child’s statement did not have sufficient indicia of reliability to be admissible under the protected persons statute.
Davis v. State, No. 49A04-0907-CR-379, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2009)
When probationer admitted only his arrest for new offense but not of probable cause, and State did not present the probable cause affidavit or any other evidence of the new offense, revocation of probation violated probationer’s due process rights.
Koors v. Steffen, No. 57A03-0904-CV-167, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 6, 2009)
When contract provided for arbitration and also left a chance a lien could arise, the possibility the court would have to engage in foreclosure procedures depending on the arbitration outcome required the court to stay the litigation pending the arbitration, rather than dismissing the suit.