Petitioner’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion for relief from judgment was untimely because: (1) he filed it more than one year after the trial court granted summary judgment against him, and (2) his earlier appeal of that judgment did not toll the one-year limit applicable to motions brought under Rule 60(B)(1)-(4).
Appeals
A.S. v. State, No. 10A01-0908-JV-423, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2010)
“[F]ailing to adequately inform a delinquent of her right to counsel is fundamental error.”
Romo v. State, No. 49A04-1003-CR-143, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2010)
English transcript of Spanish conversation was properly admitted as evidence, over objection. without playing the tape of the Spanish conversation.
Starr v. State, No. 49A04-0912-CR-677, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2010)
Passenger for whom there is no reasonable suspicion of a law violation does not commit “refusal to identify self” C misdemeanor if he refuses to identify himself.
Giddings v. State, No. 40A01-0909-PC-455, __ N.E.2D __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 25, 2010)
U.S. Supreme Court’s verdict unanimity requirement for individual components of a continuing criminal enterprise under federal criminal law is not applicable to Indiana child molesting cases.