One of three separate opinions in plurality decision would hold State had to corroborate citizen tip with testimony that officers saw no other vehicles besides defendant’s which matched the tipster’s description.
Appeals
Capital Drywall Supply, Inc. v. Jai Jagdish, Inc., No. 71A03-1004-PL-189, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 29, 2010)
“[A] mechanic’s lien claimant does not have a right to rely on telephone hearsay to identify the property owner and does so at its own risk.”
SPC Group, L.L.C. v. Dolson, Inc., No. 19A01-0912-CV-604, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2010)
Mortgage granted by Holland as surety for a note was unenforceable when the mortgage provided incorrectly that Thompson was a co-maker of the note, when in fact Thompson was only a guarantor on the note.
Upshaw v. State, No. 49A02-1003-CR-239, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2010)
After defendant’s release on recognizance satisfied his initial C.R. 4(B) motion for speedy trial in 70 days, his “renewal” of his motion, after arrest on new charges and the revocation of his release on recognizance due to the new arrest, began a new 70 day period, not a resumption of the original 70 days.
Hyche v. State, No. 49A02-0911-CR-1154, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 23, 2010)
Defendant’s arranging to buy and pay for cocaine for himself was not “dealing.”