When jurors told bailiff during trial that defendant or his family had intimidated them, it was fundamental error for trial court not to examine jurors to determine what they had been exposed to and whether they could remain impartial.
N. Vaidik
Dowell v. State, No. 32A01-0810-PC-508, __ N.E.2D __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2009)
Applies “prison mailbox rule” to P-C.R. 1 proceedings.
State v. Boadi, No. 64A05-0807-CR-420, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 13, 2009)
Failure to stop at a red light due to inadvertence or an error in judgment, without more, does not constitute recklessness.
Travelers Indemn. Co. v. Jarrells, No. 29A02-0807-CV-669, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., May 21, 2009)
Travelers Indem. Co. v. Jarrells (Ind. Ct. App., Darden, J.) – Although (or because) trial court instructed the jury that, in determining its verdict, it must consider evidence of worker’s compensation payments, employer’s insurance carrier is entitled to reimbursement from the judgment for the worker’s compensation it paid on the injured employee’s behalf.
Hayworth v. State, No. 07A01-0804-CR-197, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 20, 2009)
Continuing objection procedure requires counsel to remain silent during the subsequent admission of the class of evidence subject to the objection. Search warrant affidavit did not establish probable cause due to insufficient corroboration of informant’s statements. Affiant detective’s misleading statements amounted to deliberate, reckless, or grossly negligent conduct which “good faith” doctrine would not excuse to save the search.