Defendants were immune from suit under the federal Communications Decency Act as “providers of an interactive computer service.”
P. Mathias
Mesa v. State, No. 36A01-13080MI-362, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 25, 2014).
Summary judgment procedure applies to forfeiture actions.
Hicks v. State, No. 82A01-1306-CR-256, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 11, 2014).
When “basic questions” asked by police in “pre-interview” did not result in a confession, there was no violation of Missouri v. Seibert’s rule that police cannot purposefully withhold Miranda warnings to get a confession and then secure a Miranda waiver, based on the first confession, before questioning to get a second confession.
Harper v. State, No. 49A04-1305-CR-222, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 26, 2014).
Officer who lies to gain entrance to a home, without exigent circumstances and after consensual entry was denied, is not acting within the course of official duties so as to justify the arrest of the home owner for resisting arrest.
Davis v. Summers, No, 53A01-1305-DR-22, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2013).
Indiana law does not automatically void a marriage if one of the parties later is legally recognized as the same gender as the spouse.