To convict a person of violating a protective order, State must prove that communication with a third party was intended to be communicated to the protected party.
P. Mathias
Hanks v. State, No. 10A01-1604-PC-690, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 15, 2017).
Even though defendant could not prove ineffective assistance of counsel after entering an open plea agreement and receiving a fifty-year sentence, the post-conviction court must hear evidence and determine if the plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
Jones v. State, No. 49A05-1606-CR-1433, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 2, 2017).
At probation revocation hearing, trial court is not required to ask a defendant if he wants to make a statement, but must allow one to be made if requested.
Sams v. State, No. 67A01-1604-CR-814, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 21, 2017).
Where an item searched would not have been the target of a well-regulated inventory search, and would not have been searched at all but for the criminal suspicions of the searching officer, the search is pretextual and unreasonable and an item discovered is inadmissible.
Dermatology Assoc., P.C. v. White, No. 49A02-1512-PL-2189, __N.E.3d__ (Ind. Ct. App, Jan. 19, 2016).
To trigger the 180-day statute of limitations extension for a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff must show that she has subsequently acquired knowledge of or received information about something she did not previously know with regard to her injury and $15,000 is insufficient to compensate her for that more serious injury.