State did not properly authenticate evidence to establish a chain of custody for blood sample that tested positive for meth.
N. Vaidik
State v. Summers, No. 09A02-1604-MI-933, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 19, 2016).
Applying the intent-effects test, no ex post facto violation occurred when defendant committed the underlying offense in Illinois before Indiana’s definition of sex offender had been amended to include an obligation to register as a sex offender.
Sturdivant v. State, 08A02-1601-CR-186, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 28, 2016).
Trial courts are in the best position to assess the competency of criminal defendants and the knowingness and intelligence of waivers of the right to counsel, and that determination will only be reversed if it was clearly erroneous.
In re J.B., No. 48S02-1604-MI-183, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 8, 2016).
On rehearing, reverses that part of the CHINS court’s order that discharged the parties and terminated the CHINS case and remands this case for further proceedings consistent with the CHINS statutes, including any appropriate services for Mother.
Henriquez v. State, No. 20A04-1510-CR-1841, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 9, 2016).
Ind. Code § 35-38-1-1(b) requires trial courts to advise a defendant of the earliest and latest possible release dates, but trial courts are not equipped to make this specific determination. Defendant was not harmed by the trial court’s failure to estimate the dates.