“[J]udicial review of an administrative determination of just compensation should be limited to the consideration of whether there is substantial evidence to support the agency’s finding and order and whether the action constitutes an abuse of discretion, is arbitrary, capricious, or in excess of statutory authority as revealed by the uncontradicted facts.”
M. Robb
Brent v. State, No. 34A04-1105-CR-268, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2011).
Marijuana found on street on passenger’s side of auto, where it may have been thrown from passenger’s window, coupled with driver’s suspicious behavior, was not sufficient to establish the passenger possessed the marijuana.
Yao v. State, No. 35A02-1006-CR-678, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 22, 2011).
Purchases by telephone from Texas business with shipping to Indiana address did not establish territorial jurisdiction for counterfeiting and theft charges.
Lucas v. McDonald, No. 63A04-1010-PL-644, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 15, 2011).
Sex offender registration relief statute confers discretion on court to deny relief even though the court finds the petitioner has made the showings required by the remedy statute to qualify for relief or, in the absence of findings, even though the evidence in the record would support a decision the petitioner made the required showings.
Hawkins v. State, No. 79A02-1101-CR-100, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 18, 2011).
Sentence modification statute’s 365 day period in which judge may modify without prosecutor agreement starts when original sentence is imposed and is not “reset” with a resentencing.