Indiana Criminal Rule 26 warrants that, where a qualifying arrestee does not present a substantial risk of flight or danger to self or others, a trial court should release the arrestee without money bail or surety subject to such restrictions and conditions as determined by the court. Moreover, our Indiana Code provides that, in setting the amount of bail or deciding whether to grant conditional pre-trial release, trial courts must consider all facts relevant to the risk of a defendant’s failure to appear, including factors enumerated in Indiana Code Section 35-33-8-4(b).
Appeals
Fields v. State, 20A-CR-1799, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 26, 2021).
Notwithstanding a waiver of appeal provision in a plea agreement, a defendant who was sentenced contrary to law is an eligible defendant permitted to seek a belated appeal pursuant to Post-Conviction Rule 2.
B.R. v. State, 20A-JV-1203, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2021).
To prove constructive possession, the State must demonstrate that the person has (1) the capability to maintain dominion and control over the item; and (2) the intent to maintain dominion and control over it.
Smith v. State, 20A-CR-1014, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 20, 2021).
In a trial in absentia, it is not error for the trial court to inform the jury that defendant was personally notified of the trial date.
Madden v. State, 20A-CR-196, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 12, 2021).
Convictions for Level 2 Kidnapping for Ransom and Level 5 Kidnapping, based on one removal, violate double jeopardy. In addition, convictions for both criminal confinement and kidnapping, both enhanced based on a demand for ransom, and are so compressed in terms of time, place, singleness of purpose, and continuity of action as to constitute a single transaction,” violate double jeopardy.