Evidence of drug involvement, and whether the suspect and officer are in a confined space, are both part of the totality of the circumstances contributing to an officer’s reasonable belief that a subject is armed and dangerous as to permit a Terry frisk.
M. Massa
Clark v. Mattar, No. 20S-CT-109, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 9, 2020).
When juror stated he did not want to serve as a juror, had a favorable impression of doctors, and stated repeatedly that he could not and would not be able to assess non-economic damages, he should have been struck for cause; a new trial is appropriate.
McCain v. State, No. 20S-CR-281, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 30, 2020).
Trial court’s comments disagreeing with the jury’s verdict were insufficient to taint the sentencing decision, and the sentence was not inappropriate given the nature of the crime and defendant’s demonstrated character
Seo v. State, No. 18S-CR-595, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 23, 2020).
Even if a search warrant has been issued, forcing a person to unlock, and therefore disclose that contents of their cellphone, violates the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Gammons v. State, No. 20S-CR-22, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 26, 2020).
Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 10.0300 dilutes the causal standard for self-defense; the instructional error was not harmless and case was remanded for a new trial.