The dealing in a synthetic drug and possession of a synthetic drug offenses, as in effect in 2012, are unconstitutionally vague.
Appeals
N.S. v. State, No. 49A05-1407-JV-338, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2015).
Illegal search of car passenger’s backpack was a “lead” which produced testimony of driver about his prior knowledge of the backpack’s contraband contents, so that the driver’s testimony was “fruit of the poisonous tree” and should have been suppressed.
J.K. v. T.C., No. 64A05-1406-PO-259, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 23, 2015).
Protective orders can’t be reissued, renewed, or extended “ad infinitum based solely upon evidence related to the protective order’s initial issuance,” the petitioner “bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a new protective order or extension of an existing order is required.”
J.P. v. Mid American Sound, No. 49A04-1405-CT-207, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 14, 2015).
The Indiana Tort Claims Act aggregate liability cap, as applied to the defendant, is constitutional.
Gertiser v. Stokes, No. 29A02-1401-DR-43, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 14, 2015).
It should have been considered a substantial and continuing change of circumstances when a woman receiving spousal maintenance now has substantial income and assets as a result of remarriage.