When a defendant is charged with a crime elevated based upon a prior infraction, the trial court is not required to bifurcate the proceedings. Because Lorazepam’s status as a legend drug was not an issue of fact—it was identified in court by a name specifically designated as a controlled substance by the Indiana Code—the trial court did not erroneously invade the province of the jury by giving instructions that created a mandatory presumption indicating that the substance was classified as a legend drug.
Appeals
McNeil v. Anonymous Hospital, No. 22A-CC-2209, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 5, 2023).
Ind. Code § 31-33-6-1(b) represents a deliberate legislative policy determination that notwithstanding the reporting immunity provided under subsection (a), the standard of care for qualified healthcare providers under the Medical Malpractice Act applies to child abuse reporting.
Winans v. State, No. 23A-CR-80, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 26, 2023).
Where a defendant preserves their right to a jury trial, failure to object to a subsequently scheduled bench trial is insufficient to constitute waiver.
In re Z.H., No. 23A-JC-1120, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 27, 2023).
The filing of a motion to dismiss does not mandate dismissal of a CHINS case; the decision rests in the trial court’s discretion. Trial courts should review the reasons proffered in support of dismissal in light of the evidence and allegations and then determine whether dismissal is in the child’s best interests.
In re Adoption of E.S.J., No. 23A-AD-1161, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 28, 2023).
Ind. Code 31-19-2-2, regarding adoptions, is a special venue statute to which T.R. 75(A)(8) applies. Preferred venue lies in any county where the petition is to be filed under the statute.