Determinations of defendant’s ability to pay fines, court costs, and public defender fund reimbursement were not required at sentencing when the payments were deferred until post-sentence events. When victim had obtained a civil judgment against defendant prior to sentencing, trial court might have to adjust restitution order to avoid double recovery for victim.
Appeals
Elrod v. Brooks, No. 10A01-0903-CV-155, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 29, 2009)
Small claims court abused its discretion when it denied plaintiff the opportunity to present evidence refuting defendant’s counterclaim after defendant presented his evidence.
In re Termination of Parental Relationship of J.G., No. 32A04-0902-JV-79, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2009)
Notwithstanding the recent revision of the relevant statutes, the General Assembly did not intend for DCS to bear the burden of court-appointed legal services in termination proceedings, and the county should continue to be responsible for those costs.
Nealy v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., No. 49A02-0812-CV-1096, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 10, 2009)
Insurance company was not entitled to setoff pursuant to the advance payment statute because there were multiple defendants and the insurance company was the plaintiffs’, rather than the defendants’, insurer.
Moore v. State, No. 29A02-0811-CR-1039, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 22, 2009)
As inmate’s objection to DOC sex offender treatment program’s polygraph requirements was grounded in his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, trial court had subject matter jurisdiction to hear his motion challenging DOC discipline imposed for alleged invocation of his privilege.