Convictions for leaving the scene of an accident, OWI causing serious bodily injury, OWI endangering a person, and operating a vehicle with an ACE of 0.08 or more, constitute double jeopardy under both the actual evidence test and common-law prohibitions.
Appeals
State v. Kirby, No. 18A-PL-2334, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 4, 2019).
The unlawful-entry statute, prohibiting a serious sex offender from entering school property, is not an unconstitutional ex post facto law as applied to defendant who had to stop attending his son’s school events.
Martin v. Ramos, No. 18A-SC-1648, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2019).
Expert medical testimony is still necessary in small claims proceedings, unless a layperson can readily understand the causation.
Rose v. Martin’s Super Markets LLC, No. 18A-CT-1654, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2019).
Grocery store had no duty to customer prior to shooting, because it was not reasonably foreseeable for a grocery store to expect death by gunfire to befall a customer. Because the grocery store did not have knowledge of customer’s injury in time to offer her assistance, the store also had no duty to protect her from exacerbation of her injuries.
Ind. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co. v. Weaver, No. 18A-CT-2043, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 1, 2019).
The term “using” is ambiguous in an auto insurance policy, because its meaning is susceptible to differing interpretations by reasonable persons; “using” is not synonymous with “operating.”