When a person has been simultaneously confined in connection with multiple causes and the court must impose consecutive sentences across those causes, Indiana law requires the trial court to (1) calculate credit time at the rate associated with the first sentence in the sequence of sentences and (2) allocate the time to that first sentence.
Appeals
Wells v. State, 21A-CR-612, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2021).
Exclusion from trial for failing a drug test is improper. In such instances, a trial court should apply, and exhaust, lesser contempt penalties, before imposing the extreme sanction of the deprivation of fundamental rights.
Olympic Financial Group, Inc., v. State, 21A-CR-1017, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 17, 2021).
For the State to seize cash and seek its forfeiture—or turnover—it must show a nexus between the cash and some sort of criminal activity
Wilburn v. State, 20A-CR-1709, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 20, 2021).
A conviction for burglary cannot be sustained if an alleged perpetrator enters a business open to the public during business hours, with intent to commit a felony or theft in it, due to a lack of evidence as to breaking.
I.G. v. State, No. 21A-JV-479, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 10, 2021).
The odor of marijuana, by itself, is not enough to establish probable cause to arrest the occupants of a vehicle.