When being pulled over by the police, a driver does not have full discretion to choose to stop anywhere, but with “adequate justification” might have some discretion to choose the location of a stop. Whether the driver exercises limited discretion in choosing a place to stop should be a question of fact for the jury.
Appeals
Taylor-Bey v. State, No. 49A05-1503-CR-123, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App, April 28, 2016).
Trial court had jurisdiction over a “Moorish American National Sovereign.”
Stewart v. Alunday, No. 16A04-1507-CT-760, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App, April 28, 2016).
Judicial admissions are conclusive and binding on the trier of fact.
Love v. State, No. 20A05-1509-CR-1327, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 20, 2016).
Trial court should have dismissed, rather than denied, defendant’s habeas petition that was in substance an unauthorized successive PCR.
Roar v. State, No. 49A02-1506-CR-506 , ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 21, 2016).
Conditional threat to victim (that “if I came back on the property[] he’d kill me”) supported conviction for intimidation (disagreeing with C.L. v. State, 2 N.E.3d 798, 801 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. not sought and Causey v. State, 45 N.E.2d 1239 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), trans. not sought).