When a trial court grants a defendant’s motion for continuance because of the State’s failure to comply with the defendant’s discovery requests, the resulting delay is not chargeable to the defendant. It does not matter whether the State was negligent in complying the discovery request.
L. Weissmann
Owens v. State, No. 21A-CR-1900, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 28, 2023).
The criminal code demonstrates our legislature’s intent that a habitual offender amendment be filed no less than 30 days before the beginning of trial as opposed to a particular trial setting.
Posterity Scholar House, LP v. FCCI Ins. Co., No. 22A-EV-1751, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 1, 2023).
The common law duty of good faith in performing its obligations under an insurance policy that an insurer owes its insured a does not extend to the relationship between surety and obligee in the context of performance and payment bonds on a construction project.
Smith v. State, No. 22A-CR-00364, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 25, 2022).
Prosecuting attorneys have broad discretion to bargain with a defendant in resolving criminal charges through a pretrial diversion program. But once the State enters into a valid diversion agreement, it may not unilaterally revoke the agreement based only on buyer’s remorse.
McQuinn v. State, No. 21A-CR-1637, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 19, 2022).
An appellate opinion based upon review of sufficiency of the evidence will rarely, if ever, be an appropriate basis for a jury instruction. Moreover, the personal jury waiver requirement is required in the second phase of a bifurcated trial.