Taken as a whole, trial court’s presumption of innocence instructions were proper, even though they did not contain express direction that the jurors must fit the evidence to the presumption of innocence or reconcile the evidence on the theory defendant was innocent.
Appeals
Brock v. State, No. 79A04-1208-CR-433, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).
Consecutivity for intimidation sentence enhanced with habitual offender status and for “progressive penalty statute” enhanced second-conviction auto theft did not violate the prohibition of “double enhancement” when the enhancements were not based on the same prior felony conviction.
Sparks v. State, No. 49A02-1207-CR-593, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2013).
When probationer heard judge say judge was inclined to impose a four year sentence if probationer admitted the violation and probationer then admitted, court’s imposition of a five year sentence without a hearing on the violation was fundamental error.
Turner v. Turner, No. 85A02-1208-DR-704,___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2013).
The amended child support statute, Ind. Code § 31-16-6-6, trumps language in a dissolution decree providing that father was obligated to pay child support until son reached the age of twenty-one.
Carrillo v. State, No. 49A02-1112-PC-1209, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 18, 2013).
Suggests the trial court judge may play a role in having defense counsel advise defendant of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea, in holding that it was not ineffective assistance in 2006 for counsel to fail to determine whether defendant was not a citizen.