State has the burden to demonstrate the reasonableness of a warrantless search in light of three factors: 1) the degree of concern, suspicion, or knowledge that a violation has occurred, 2) the degree of intrusion the method of the search or seizure imposes on a citizen’s ordinary activities, and 3) the extent of law enforcement needs.
M. Massa
Humphrey v. State, No. 48S02-1609-PC-480, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 5, 2017).
Post-conviction relief due to ineffective assistance of counsel was granted fifteen years after murder conviction affirmed on appeal and not barred by the doctrine of laches.
State v. Smith, No. 45S05-1611-CR-572, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 28, 2017).
Defendant’s plea agreement foreclosing the possibility of sentence conversion was not altered by a subsequent statute allowing courts to modify a post-sentence conviction.
Consumer Attorney Services, P.A. v. State, No. 49S05-1703-PL-161, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind,, March 21, 2017).
Neither the Credit Services Organizations Act, Mortgage Rescue Protection Fraud Act, Home Loan Practices Act, nor Deceptive Consumer Sales Act provides an exemption for law firms.
J.D.M. v. State, No. 21S01-1702-JV-84, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 15, 2017).
Juvenile court may not conduct sex offender registry hearing for defendant who was not on probation and who remained at a non-secure treatment facility.