Once a defendant demonstrates that they have testified pursuant to a grant of immunity to matters related to the prosecution before a grand jury, the State has the burden of showing an independent, legitimate source for the disputed evidence if the defendant/witness is the target of the same grand jury.
E. Brown
Grecco v. State, No. 24A-CR-260, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2024).
Accessing obscene animated child pornography from one’s own home is protected conduct under the First Amendment.
Kerwood v. Elkhart Co. Sheriff’s Dept., No. 23A-PL-2229, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 10, 2024).
Ind. Code § 35-38-9-10(f) sets forth mechanisms to enforce expungement provisions; no private right of action exists for failure to properly expunge or seal records after an expungement order is issued.
Bradley v. State, No. 22A-CR-2317, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2024).
When a trial court sua sponte orders a competency evaluation for a defendant, the early trial period is tolled, and the delay is chargeable to neither the State nor the defendant. Once the competency evaluation is complete and the 70-day early trial period resumes, the State must fulfill its affirmative duty to bring the defendant to trial.
Murphy v. Cook, No. 23A-SC-1614, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2023).
Courts should be mindful of the provisions and requirements of T.R. 64(A) with respect to issuing a body attachment, including the provision that body attachments expire 180 days after issuance and the expiration date must appear on the face of the writ.