Defendant waived his right of confrontation when he did not attend the victim’s trial deposition, conducted via Skype when she was in Louisiana, after he had been invited to attend.
N. Vaidik
White v. State, No. 29A05-1312-PC-641, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2014).
There is no “class-of-one” defense to criminal charges.
LBM Realty, LLC, v. Mannia, No. 71A03-1402-PL-66, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 28, 2014).
“Indiana should hereby adopt the largely case-by-case approach, finding that a tenant’s liability to the landlord’s insurer for damage-causing negligence depends on the reasonable expectations of the parties to the lease as ascertained from the lease as a whole and any other admissible evidence.”
Hall v. State, No. 49A05-1312-CR-614, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 4, 2014).
Trial court erred in excluding phone call transcript containing information about alleged molesting victim’s apparent false accusation of nonconsensual sex with another individual; also holds trial court erred in not compelling a party to the phone call to answer deposition questions about the call.
In re S.E., No. 29A02-1312-JT-1064, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 30, 2014).
Trial court did not violate defendant’s due-process rights by requiring her to testify by signing to an interpreter.