Modifies probation condition requiring polygraph exam.
J. Baker
Miller v. State, No. 09A02-0812-CR-1133, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 30, 2009)
Reverses for “demonstrative” use of video in final argument, when video was not in evidence and would have probably been inadmissible, was prejudicial, and pertained only to an undisputed issue.
Gerber v. State, No. 02A03-0902-CR-73, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 28, 2009)
Gerber v. State (Ind. Ct. App., May, J.) – Expungement statute does not require petitioner to wait until limitations period for dismissed charge has run, and trial judge erred in summarily dismissing expungement petition on that basis; on remand, prosecutor is not authorized to participate due to failure to have filed a notice of opposition.
Kimbrough v. State, No. 20A03-0901-CR-29, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 13, 2009)
Determinations of defendant’s ability to pay fines, court costs, and public defender fund reimbursement were not required at sentencing when the payments were deferred until post-sentence events. When victim had obtained a civil judgment against defendant prior to sentencing, trial court might have to adjust restitution order to avoid double recovery for victim.
In re Termination of Parental Relationship of J.G., No. 32A04-0902-JV-79, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2009)
Notwithstanding the recent revision of the relevant statutes, the General Assembly did not intend for DCS to bear the burden of court-appointed legal services in termination proceedings, and the county should continue to be responsible for those costs.