Trial court judge’s statements throughout protection order hearing demonstrate that judge failed to preside over the hearing as a neutral, impartial decision maker and violated defendants’ due process rights.
E. Brown
Marshall v. State, No. 21A-CR-1123, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 7, 2022).
Upon a request for self-representation, the defendant should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish a knowing and intelligent decision.
Sawyer v. State, 20A-CR-1446, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 19, 2021).
Indiana Code § 35-40-5-11.5, effective March 18, 2020, restricts a defendant’s ability to take the deposition of a child less than sixteen years of age who is the victim or alleged victim of a sex offense. Because the statute is procedural in nature, and because it conflicts with the Indiana Trial Rules, the Indiana Trial Rules govern and the provisions of the statute in conflict are a nullity.
Bonds v. State, 20A-CR-1449, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 31, 2021).
An allegation by an inmate that the trial court has not included credit time earned in its sentencing is the type of claim appropriately advanced by a motion to correct sentence.
Campbell v. State, 19A-CR-2414, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 21, 2020).
To file a belated habitual offender charge, the State must affirmatively demonstrate good cause.