Trial courts are in the best position to assess the competency of criminal defendants and the knowingness and intelligence of waivers of the right to counsel, and that determination will only be reversed if it was clearly erroneous.
Appeals
Herron v. State, No. 71A04-1602-CR-306, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2016).
Where the state charged the defendant with obstruction of justice citing the wrong provision of that statute, defendant’s motion for directed verdict should have been granted.
Sedam v. 2Jr Pizza Enterprises, No. 39A05-1602-CT-296, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 27, 2016).
An employer’s admission that its employee committed the alleged negligent act within the course and scope of her employment does not preclude an action for negligent hiring, training, supervision, and retention.
Coleman v. State, 49A02-1511-CR-1999, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 21, 2016).
Trial court must hold an indigency hearing before imposing a public defender fee, probation fee, or drug and alcohol treatment fee.
Cline v. State, 38A04-1512-XP-2221, __ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., August 15, 2016).
Although a trial court has discretion in granting or denying an expungement petition, it does not extend to a disregard of remedial measures enacted by our lawmakers. Such statutes should be liberally construed to advance the remedy for which they were enacted.