When post-conviction court determines petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, the remedy is a new trial, not a trial court order that petitioner received a second direct appeal.
E. Brown
Huntington Nat’l Bank v. Car-X Assoc. Corp., No. 64A04-1405-MF-227, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 3, 2014).
When the employee that typically received notice was on maternity leave, in light of the short length of the delay, the security interest of Defendant, the amount at issue, the absence of evidence of prejudice to Plaintiff by the delay, and the severity of the sanction of default judgment, Defendant’s failure to respond to complaint constituted excusable neglect under T.R. 60(B)(1).
Dawson v. Thornton, Inc., No. 49A02-1403-CT-208, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 22, 2014).
The trial court properly did not instruct the jury regarding spoliation of evidence when plaintiff inspected and took pictures of the evidence, and the evidence was available for over a year after the incident.
Griffith v. State, No. 48A02-1310-CR-909, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 30, 2014).
Trial court properly excluded testimony from two witnesses about prior inconsistent statements made by a witness who had testified earlier.
Perryman v. State, No. 20A03-1308-PC-299, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jul. 30, 2014).
Evidence of controlled buy of cocaine from defendant, which was relied on to obtain the search warrant which produced the cocaine and marijuana on which charges were based, was “intrinsic” to the charged crimes and accordingly not barred by Evidence Rule 404(b).