Although the court did not have personal jurisdiction over husband, it could dissolve the marriage and change the parties’ status from married to unmarried; it could not, however, adjudicate the incidences of marriage. Trial court also erred by not complying with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act in the child custody proceedings.
Appeals
In re Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of I.B., No. 03A05-0912-JV-676, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 17, 2010)
Trial court did not err in denying appellate counsel for mother in TPR proceedings; even if mother had requested appellate counsel, she failed to make any effort for the purpose of an appeal and was unlikely to prevail on the merits.
Bishop v. Housing Auth. of South Bend, No. 71A03-0906-CV-273, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 1, 2010)
Tenant had right to jury trial on the ultimate outcome of ejectment proceedings, but not on the prejudgment immediate possession hearing.
Palacios v. State, No. 29A02-0908-CR-750, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 26, 2010)
Daughter’s translation of her mother’s statements to investigating officer were admissible under the present sense impression hearsay exception.
Skinner v. State, No. 55A01-0811-CR-543, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2010)
Former defense counsel, who had withdrawn when another client, defendant’s jailmate, became a state’s witness, could not be compelled to disclose what he had learned from the prospective witness through the attorney-client relationship, particularly when there were adequate alternative sources of impeachment available to defendant.