When determining whether to appoint counsel, trial courts must consider three distinct items—assets, income, and necessary expenses in calculating a defendant’s ability to pay. If the parties fail to provide the information, courts themselves must make inquiries calculated to bring out the necessary evidence.
P. Foley
Kelly v. State, No. 24A-CT-859, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 23, 2024).
The State is not obligated to defend and indemnify a former state agency employee for civil liability stemming from employee’s criminal conduct.
In re J.M., No. 24A-JC-202, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 15, 2024).
Trial court’s decision to modify child custody instead of adjudicating children as CHINS did not deprive parent of a meaningful opportunity to engage in CHINS-related services.
Anderson v. State, No. 23A-CR-02609, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 4, 2024).
The grand jury statutory framework does not mandate that the State submit a matter for deliberation as to whether to issue an indictment. The State need not identify or name the target of the grand jury proceeding and identify the crime that the target was alleged to have committed unless the grand jury proceeds to deliberate on whether to issue an indictment.
NFI Interactive Logistics, LLC v. Bruski, No. 24S-CR-217, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2024).
Trial court properly denied TR 12(B)(6) motion; the complaint encompasses viable claims premised on the failure to warn after potentially contributing to a hazard on the road, and the failure to comply with the statute requiring driver to turn on emergency flashers and place warning devices behind his vehicle.