The trial court violated defendant’s federal and state constitutional rights of confrontation when the court required the witnesses to wear masks while testifying without entering specific facts of necessity. However, the error was harmless.
P. Mathias
State v. $2,435 in U.S Currency, No. 22A-CR-00578, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 19, 2022).
It is well-settled that the State’s civil forfeiture complaints are outside of Article 1, Section 20, and are equitable claims to be tried by the court.
Cole v. Cole, No. 21A-MI-2415, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 28, 2022).
Under the Hague Convention, interests of children in matters relating to their custody are best served when decisions are made in the child’s country of habitual residence. Determination of a child’s habitual residence is fact-intensive and varies with the circumstances of each case.
In re change of gender of O.J.G.S., No. 21A-MI-2096, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 2, 2022).
Ind. Code § 16-37-2-10 does not grant courts the authority to order a change of gender marker on a birth certificate.
Fedij v. State, No. 21A-CR-1481, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 11, 2022).
Unlike the labels on regulated pharmaceuticals, or warnings on products containing dangerous ingredients, nothing in the writing or symbols of cannabis-based products provide a detailed analysis of the products’ chemical compositions, their directions for use, or specific warnings from their misuse. Therefore, the market reports exception to the hearsay rule (Evidence Rule 803(17)) does not appeal to the writing or symbols on a cannabis-based package.