There is no statutory, constitutional, or common law restriction on court’s discretion to impose consecutive sentences for misdemeanor offenses. However, court must conduct indigency hearing before imposing a fine.
P. Mathias
Hale v. State, No. 35A02-1501-CR-57, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2015).
Denial of motion to depose codefendants, though error, was not properly preserved for appeal; when codefendants testified at trial, defendant did not seek to exclude their testimony, renew his request to depose them, or seek a continuance.
Gross v. State, No. 41A01-1411-CR-467, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 14, 2015).
Due process required dismissal of charges against incompetent defendant, when he had been certified unlikely to be restored to competence and had been committed for longer than his maximum possible sentence less credit time.
Singh v. State, No. 49A02-1410-CR-717, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 20, 2015).
Distinct evidence supported convictions for attempted promotion of human trafficking and criminal confinement; convictions therefore did not violate double jeopardy.
State v. Stevens, No. 62A01-1406-CR-268, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., June 12, 2015).
IDACS criminal-history data that defendant had out-of-state methamphetamine conviction, though inaccurate, gave probable cause to arrest him for attempted possession of a precursor; police had no duty to confirm accuracy of the data.