Distinguishing caselaw holding that, for the OWI offense, endangerment cannot be inferred from intoxication alone, affirms public intoxication conviction on basis defendant’s presence while intoxicated with a car at a gas station supported an inference he operated the vehicle while intoxicated and thus committed the public intoxication element of endangering himself or others.
B. Dickson
Gaddie v. State, No. 49S02-1312-CR-789, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 27, 2014).
“To avoid conflict with the Fourth Amendment . . . the statute defining the offense of Resisting Law Enforcement by fleeing after being ordered to stop must be construed to require that a law enforcement officer’s order to stop be based on reasonable suspicion or probable cause.”
Robinson v. Erie Ins. Exchange, No. 49S02-1311-PL-733, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 11, 2014).
The auto insurance policy issued to a family does not provide uninsured motorists coverage in a hit-and-run accident.
Ryan v. State, No. 49S02-1311-CR-734, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 3, 2014).
Affirms conviction, “concluding that some of the prosecutor’s conduct was improper, but because of the absence of any timely objection by the defendant, reversal is not warranted.”
David v. Kleckner, No. 49S02-1405-MI-355, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 28, 2014).
“[I]n determining whether a medical malpractice claim has been commenced within the medical malpractice statute of limitations, the discovery or trigger date is the point when a claimant either knows of the malpractice and resulting injury, or learns of facts that, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should lead to the discovery of the malpractice and the resulting injury.”