“In determining a reasonable amount of attorney’s fees, consideration should be given to the nature and difficulty of the litigation; the time, skill, and effort involved; the fee customarily charged for similar legal services; the amount involved; the time limitations imposed by the circumstances; and the result achieved in the litigation.” There is no definitive cap to attorney’s fee awards based on the potential or actual recovery.
C. Bradford
Curtis v. State, No. 18A02-1501-CR-59, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 26, 2015).
Robbing a pharmacist of painkillers, robbing a pharmacy technician of her car keys, then stealing the technician’s car parked outside the pharmacy, were separate and distinct criminal acts and did not amount to a “single larceny.”
Bryant v. State, No. 90A04-1501-CR-11, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2015).
In prosecution for receiving stolen property, county where the property was stolen was a proper venue, regardless of whether defendant knew where the theft occurred.
Wilson v. State, No. 45A03-1409-CR-317, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 30, 2015).
When the defendant struggled with the bailiffs after using profanity and disrupting the trial, the defendant waived his right to be present and the trial court did not err by removing him from the courtroom without first having warned him such conduct would result in removal.
Jackson v. State, No. 34A01-1409-CR-455, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 31, 2015).
Probation condition to report within forty-eight hours an arrest or charge for a “new criminal offense” was ambiguous as to whether it applied to an arrest or charge for an offense committed before the probationary period began; holds the ambiguity must be construed against the State, so that the reporting condition did not include arrests or charges for offenses committed before probation began.