It is well-settled that the State’s civil forfeiture complaints are outside of Article 1, Section 20, and are equitable claims to be tried by the court.
Appeals
J.L. v. M.M., No. 22A-PO-512, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 6, 2022).
The protection order statutes should not be used as a de facto method to modify custody and/or parenting time. However, the protection order statutes offer expedited and ex parte proceedings to provide a “stop gap” to stabilize the situation until the trial court can determine the best interests of the child in a modification proceeding.
Haslam v. State, No. 22A-CR-00911, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 30, 2022).
Credit time earned while confined on home detention as a condition of probation reduces the length of home detention, not the length of the probation.
Newcomb, Jr. v. State, No. 22A-PC-318, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2022).
A miscarriage of justice, including when a person is convicted of an offense they did not commit, can be corrected within the confines of post-conviction relief.
Saucerman v. State, No. 22A-CR-501, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 17, 2022).
A trial court’s failure to ensure that a probationer who admits to a probation violation has received the advisements as required under Ind. Code § 35-38-2-3(e) constitutes a fundamental violation of the probationer’s due process rights.