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.
P. Mathias
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.
Chapman v. State, No. 21A-CR-421, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., March 23, 2022).
Ind. Code § 35-49-2-2(1)(matter or performance harmful to minors) does not require explicit depiction of the acts or condition, but it allows for the acts and/or condition to be described or represented in any form. A judge’s preliminary determination of obscenity, or that material is probably harmful to minors under Ind. Code § 35-49-2-4, is not evidence on which the parties can rely at trial or relay to the jury, and the jury should not be made aware of the trial court’s preliminary decision.