For the jury to receive an instruction on alleged lesser-included offense, the offense must either be an inherently or factually included offense to the principal charge and there must be a serious evidentiary dispute regarding the element that distinguishes the lesser offense from the principal charge. Moreover, a defendant must receive fair notice of the charge against which he must defend at trial.
E. Brown
Singh v. Singh, No. 20A-CT-959, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2020).
Temple had a duty to protect its attendees when it had notice of present and specific circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to recognize the risk of an imminent criminal act, and had reason to recognize the probability or likelihood of looming harm on a special day of celebration.
Blackford v. Welborn Clinic, No. 19A-CT-2054, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2020).
A nonclaim statute may be tolled in cases of fraudulent concealment.
Cook v. State, No. 19A-CR-2225, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 31, 2020).
Statements to a witness in a pending action to “bow out” to not “lose anything in the end” is sufficient to sustain a conviction for attempted obstruction of justice.
Buford v. State, No. 19A-CR-956, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2019).
Criminal contempt for violation of a no contact order and ninety-day jail sentence was vacated on double jeopardy grounds because the State filed an invasion of privacy charge on the same day as the contempt hearing.