A trial court may impose consecutive advisory sentences in a case involving multiple acts of child molestation against a single victim.
Per Curiam
Shaw v. State, No. 19S-PC-466, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 21, 2019).
A second or successive post-conviction petition is subject to the screening procedure outlined in P-C. R. 1(12) and must have appellate court authorization to proceed; however, a post-conviction petition that raises only issues emerging from a new trial, new sentencing, or new appeal obtained from a federal court through habeas proceedings is not a “second” or “successive” petition and does not require prior authorization.
Dadouch v. State, No. 19S-CR-404, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., July 16, 2019).
Trial judges should use both the written advisement of rights form together with the dialogue set forth in the Criminal Benchbook when advising defendants of their rights in a misdemeanor case.
Springfield v. State, No. 19S-CR-348, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 10, 2019).
Two or more distinct offenses may be enhanced due to the use of the same weapon during the commission of each offense, but double jeopardy protections prevent enhancement due to the continuous possession of the weapon.
Barber v. State, No. 19S-CR-329, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 29, 2019).
A person convicted of child molesting is a statutorily defined as a violent criminal and may not file for sentence modification under Ind. Code 35-38-1-17 after the elapse of 365 days from sentencing without the approval of the prosecuting attorney