The requirement that Father admit molesting child to complete sex offender treatment violates Father’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination; the trial court’s reliance on his refusal to so admit as proof that his parental rights should be terminated violates his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.
Appeals
Easler v. State, No.18A-CR-1371, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 8, 2019
The trial court properly denied defendant’s request to question a juror after the member divulged information relevant for voir dire. Defendant was convicted by a fair and impartial jury; juror disclosed relevant information voluntarily at her earliest opportunity and then assured the parties that she could still be a juror.
Heckard v. State, No. 18A-CR-1376, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 11, 2019).
The evaluation of whether the continuous crime doctrine applies is distinct from the question of whether the continuous crime doctrine has been violated.
Linares v. El Tacarajo, No. 18A-CT-276, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 8, 2019).
Using the Goodwin foreseeability analysis, an automobile salvage business did not have a duty to a patron of a mobile food truck serving food in its parking lot that exploded and caused injury to the patron.
Solomon v. State, No. 18A-CR-2041, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2019).
Defendant does not have a constitutional right to possess marijuana and Ind. Code § 35-48-4-11 does not violate Article 1, Section 1, of the Indiana Constitution as applied to him.