“Harassment” for purposes of the crime of invasion of privacy is based on the definition found in Indiana Code section 34-6-2-51.5.
Appeals
Wilson v. State, No. 25A-CR-1542, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 16, 2026).
There must be additional indicia of erratic driving or unusual driving behavior before a reasonable suspicion arises that a motorist who is merely making jerky body movements is driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Adkins, Jr. v. State, No. 24A-CR-2140, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 06, 2026).
The fact that legal hemp shares characteristics with illegal marijuana does not categorically disable law enforcement from relying on trained canine alerts that could indicate either substance.
Stokes v. State, No. 25A-CR-1740, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 30, 2026).
The period of time allowed for testing under Indiana Code section 9-30-6-2 is “within three (3) hours after the law enforcement officer had probable cause to believe the person committed an offense under IC 9-30-5. Although the statute references probable cause, the State must prove that the chemical test was performed within three hours of the defendant’s last illegal operation of the vehicle.
Williams v. State, No. 25A-CR-687, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2026).
Pretrial GPS monitoring does not fall within the statutory meaning of “confinement” for purposes of credit time.