Juvenile waiver statute’s meaningful consultation requirement was not met when juvenile’s conversation with guardian was videotaped by police and juvenile and guardian knew it was being taped.
N. Vaidik
Cranston v. State, No. 29A02-1003-CR-374, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 8, 2010)
Datamaster evidence ticket is not “testimonial hearsay” under the Crawford Confrontation Clause holding.
Oberst v. State, No. 14A05-1003-PC-157, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 3, 2010)
Because the Sixth Amendment counsel right does not apply to a pre-charge police interview, defendant could not assert a claim that counsel gave him ineffective assistance during the interview.
Moore v. State, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 21, 2010)
A woman who was asleep in the passenger seat of her car, which her friend was driving, did not thereby commit the public intoxication offense.
J.B. v. E.B., 34A04-1002-DR-110, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 20, 2010)
J.B. v. E.B. (Ind. Ct. App., Vaidik, J.)-Child custody modification proceeding based on report the son had touched his sister inappropriately was not subject to the counselor/client privilege, so that records of son’s counseling were admissible.