Assuming a defendant can waive the right to have additional charges dismissed under the Successive Prosecution Statute, this defendant, who pled guilty after waiving counsel and being advised additional charges might be filed, did not waive the right as he was not aware of his rights under the Statute and was not represented by counsel.
N. Vaidik
F.D. v. Ind. Dept of Family Svcs., No. 82A01-1109-CT-432, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 30, 2012).
There is no private right of action for failure to report child abuse under Ind. Code § 31-33-18-4.
Gulzar v. State, No. 20A03-1202-PC-88, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2012).
Even assuming, had he been advised of deportation consequences, that defendant would not have pled guilty due to the “special circumstances” that deportation would have uprooted his family, the very strong evidence of his guilt made harmless counsel’s failure to advise him that his theft plea bargain would result in automatic deportation.
Mertz v. Mertz, No. 64A03-1108-DR-360, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2012).
A trial court best determines whether under Ind. Code 31-16-12-11 the sufficiency of a plan offered by an obligor to pay arrearage is sufficient to reinstate driving privileges.
Harmon v. State, No. 20A03-1110-CR-529, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 28, 2012).
Evidence was insufficient to prove the weight of the manufactured methamphetamine was three grams or more, as required for A felony manufacturing.