(1) Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for “travel, postage, and copying” costs under Trial Rule 41(E) (failure to prosecute); (2) because defendants were forced to defend against a frivolous and groundless claim, however, trial court did abuse its discretion in denying defendants’ motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to Ind. Code § 34-52-1-1(b).
Appeals
Bond v. State, No. 71A03-0910-CR-457, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 21, 2010)
Defendant failed to show that selection of his jury from Judicial Center list violated Sixth Amendment’s “fair cross section” requirement.
L.W. v. State, No. 49A02-0909-JV-841, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 22, 2010)
Telephone tip describing a burglar from informant who identified himself when he called the police did not, in combination with all the other circumstances of the case, give the police the reasonable suspicion required for an investigatory stop.
Tisdial v. Young, No. 29A05-0909-CV-544, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 22, 2010)
Indiana Code chapter 34-26-5 requires evidence of domestic violence, stalking, or a sex offense.
Lehman v. State, No. 35A05-0909-CR-513, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 13, 2010)
Confidential informant’s taped statements as to what occurred in controlled buy were hearsay and were inadmissible as well under the Crawford Confrontation Clause rule; informant’s statements during the buy were not admitted for the truth of their content and hence were not hearsay.