Parties’ due process rights were violated when a successor judge made factual findings and legal conclusions without a trial de novo following the departure of the original judge who conducted the evidentiary hearing.
Appeals
Crabtree v. State, No. 21A-CR-2752, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 1, 2022).
Terry-level reasonable suspicion is not an absolute necessity for a dog sniff of a hotel-room door. The degree of suspicion is just one factor to be considered under the general Litchfield balancing test.
In re Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of P.B., No. 22A-JT-1397, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 22, 2022).
The clear and convincing evidence burden of proof in termination of parental rights cases satisfies the Indiana Constitution’s Due Course of Law Clause.
Stabosz v. Friedman, No. 22A-PL-541, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 22, 2022).
When a defendant moves to dismiss a case under Indiana’s anti-SLAPP statute, the motion is treated as a motion for summary judgment with the same burden of proof as a motion for summary judgment. The designated evidence must demonstrate as a matter of law that the statements were made in good faith and with a reasonable basis in law and fact.
L.W. v. State, No. 22A-JV-1138, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 23, 2022).
Ind. Code § 31-32-5-1 mandates that before consent may be established for purposes of a blood draw, a juvenile must be advised, and provided the opportunity, to have meaningful consultation with their parent/guardian.