Applies prior holding that the “attenuation doctrine” of Fourth Amendment law does not apply under the Indiana Constitution; majority opinion concludes that the Fourth Amendment inevitable discovery doctrine does not apply under the Indiana Constitution, but concurring panel members conclude instead that inevitable discovery could apply under the Indiana Constitution but that the State failed to show an inevitable discovery.
Appeals
State v. Schulze, No. 73A01-1311-CR-471, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 26, 2014).
Officer who offers a chemical test to a suspected intoxicated driver is not required to be certified to administer the test.
Withers v. State, No. 48A02-1403-CR-130, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 26, 2016).
In hearing to terminate drug court placement, trial court properly took judicial notice of notes of attendance reports in Drug Court file under Evidence Rule 201(b)(5), authorizing judicial notice of “records of a court of this state.”
Carpenter v. State, No. 02A05-1309-CR-467, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 26, 2014).
As an issue of first impression, this case holds that the hearsay rule does not prohibit admission of mail exhibits to demonstrate the defendant’s name and address were on mail found in a specific location.
Mallory v. State, No. 20A03-1403-MI-76, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 15, 2014)
Former statutory provision that victim’s statement “shall” be considered did not authorize court to refuse expungement when all petition requirements were met.