Evidence defendant’s motorcycle was going 43 miles per hour did not prove its “maximum design speed” was 25 miles per hour or more, a “design speed” the State had to prove in order to show defendant was operating a “motor vehicle” rather than a “motorized bicycle” so that defendant was guilty of driving while suspended.
J. Baker
Johnson, et al v. Sullivan et al, No. 82A05-1102-MI-108, ___ N.E.2d ____ (Ind. Ct. App. July 27, 2011).
“[E]vidence of mailing on a particular date, even if it contradicts a postmark, is competent to prove filing on that date for purposes of the Medical Malpractice Act.”
Davis v. State, No. 45A05-1008-CR-502, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 12, 2011)
The “trial court abused its discretion when it allowed a police detective to testify as a skilled witness that the denominations of money found on the defendant were indicative of drug dealing.”
White v. State, No. 15A01-1008-CR-463, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 9, 2011)
Record of defendant’s felony conviction reached in another state when he was fifteen years old was insufficient to support habitual offender finding without additional evidence on the other state’s procedures assuring that he was convicted as an adult.
B&B, LLC v. Lake Erie Land Co., No. 45A04-1002-PL-183, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 28, 2011)
A landowner, who raises the subterranean water table on his land and creates a federally regulated wetland, may not invoke the common enemy doctrine of water diversion and shield himself from liability to adjoining landowners whose property also became federally regulated wetlands.