Asking prospective jurors if they would automatically believe a child does not leave them with a false or misleading impression of the facts or warrant an explanation or rebuttal from the State.
Appeals
Exploration Center I, LLC, et al. v. MDC of Marion County, No. 25A-PL-977, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 17, 2026).
Under I.C. § 6-1.1-12.1-5.9(e), the statute’s language that the appeal shall be heard and decided within thirty days was not meant as mandatory language but was included in the statute so that the matter would be acted upon promptly and expeditiously.
Olbera, et al. v. Sykes, No. 25A-JP-2005, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 30, 2026).
Marital presumption as legal parent rebutted by biological father of child as biological father did not relinquish his rights to legal parentage.
Rodriguez v. State, No. 25A-CR-1789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 18, 2026).
Pursuant to Indiana Evidence Rule 103, a defendant preserves a continuing objection to the admission of evidence for appellate review simply by making a timely objection to that evidence during trial, identifying the specific ground for the objection, and receiving the trial court’s definitive ruling on the objection on the record at trial.
State v. Watson, No. 25A-CR-1789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 18, 2026).
Under Indiana law, prior accusations are demonstrably false where the victim has admitted the falsity of the charges or they have been disproved.