Ind. Rule of Evid. 608 sets forth two types of evidence; opinion and reputation. In contrast to reputation evidence, opinion testimony is admissible if rationally based on the witness’s perception and helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’s testimony or to a determination of a fact in issue.
Holmgren v. State, No. 21A-CR-2756, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2022).
To receive an increased sentence under Ind. Code § 35-50-2-4(c) for Level 1 felony child molesting, Apprendi mandates that a victim’s age is a fact that must be determined by the fact-finder.
Parker v. State, No. 21A-CR-1643, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 30, 2022).
A defendant cannot avail himself the rulings in another case involving another party in his own criminal case. There must be an identity of parties or their privies and mutuality of estoppel for another ruling to have preclusive effect in a criminal case.
State v. $2,435 in U.S Currency, No. 22A-CR-00578, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 19, 2022).
It is well-settled that the State’s civil forfeiture complaints are outside of Article 1, Section 20, and are equitable claims to be tried by the court.
J.L. v. M.M., No. 22A-PO-512, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 6, 2022).
The protection order statutes should not be used as a de facto method to modify custody and/or parenting time. However, the protection order statutes offer expedited and ex parte proceedings to provide a “stop gap” to stabilize the situation until the trial court can determine the best interests of the child in a modification proceeding.