When a trial court’s local practice conflicts with Criminal Rule 4(C), the local practice is invalid, and delays arising from noncompliance with such practices cannot be charged to defendants.
P. Felix
Stafford v. Stafford, No. 24A-DC-2457, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 21, 2025).
Eliminating all overnights amounts to a restriction on parenting time.
Payne v. State, No. 23A-CR-2325, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 13, 2024).
A trial court may evaluate a defendant’s conduct before, during, and after trial, in addition to prior competency evaluations in determining whether they are competent to stand trial.
In re M.H., No. 23A-JC-2959, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2024).
With good cause, a court may sua sponte set a CHINS factfinding hearing beyond the 60-day deadline imposed by Ind. Code 31-34-11-1(a). However, judicial economy alone is not sufficient good cause.
Bradley v. State, No. 22A-CR-2317, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2024).
When a trial court sua sponte orders a competency evaluation for a defendant, the early trial period is tolled, and the delay is chargeable to neither the State nor the defendant. Once the competency evaluation is complete and the 70-day early trial period resumes, the State must fulfill its affirmative duty to bring the defendant to trial.