Traditional rule that a post-conviction court may not take judicial of the transcript in the original proceedings appears to have been ended by the 2010 amendment to Evidence Rule 201(b)(5) allowing judicial notice of “records of a court of this state,” but since petitioner did not request judicial notice and court did not sua sponte take it the transcript was not in evidence in the post-conviction proceeding.
N. Vaidik
Burke v. State, No. 49A02-1006-CR-660, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 21, 2011)
Sentence enhancement for burglary of a structure used for religious worship does not violate federal Constitution’s Establishment Clause or Indiana Constitution’s prohibition of government preference for a particular religion.
State v. Laker, No. 24A04-0912-CR-736, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2010)
Operating a farm tractor while intoxicated is an operating while intoxicated offense, but operating a farm tractor while driving privileges are suspended is not an offense.
Jewell v. State, No. 32A04-1003-CR-187, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2010)
Defendant’s federal and state constitutional rights to counsel were not violated when police had minor, for whom defendant was charged with assisting to get a tattoo, call the defendant and elicit statements police recorded about defendant’s prior criminal sexual conduct with the minor.
In the Matter of the Paternity of: P.R., No. 36A01-1005-JP-255, ____ N.E.2d ______ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2010)
Trial court properly took judicial notice of record in another proceeding, pursuant to Evidence Rule 201 as amended effective Jan. 2010, and permissibly did so post-hearing; the parties had the right to be heard on the notice but failed to demand it, thereby waiving the opportunity, although the better practice would have been for the trial court to have given the parties notice and an opportunity to be heard before taking the judicial notice and issuing its order.