“[O]nce concealment has been established, statutes of limitations for criminal offenses are tolled under Indiana Code section 35-41-4-2(h) (2008) until a prosecuting authority becomes aware or should have become aware of sufficient evidence to charge the defendant.”
Supreme
Barnes v. State, No. 82S05-1007-CR-343, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., May 12, 2011)
Affirms trial court refusal to instruct on right to resist illegal police entry of home, as “a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence.”
Coleman v. State, No. 20S03-1008-CR-458, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., May 18, 2011)
Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy clause does not preclude State “from retrying a defendant where in the first trial the jury acquitted the defendant of murder with respect to one victim but failed to return a verdict on a charge of attempted murder with respect to another victim.”
Pfenning v. Lineman, No. 27S02-1006-CV-331, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 18, 2011)
“ We reject the concept that a participant in a sporting event owes no duty of care to protect others from inherent risks of the sport but adopt instead the view that summary judgment is proper due to the absence of breach of duty when the conduct of a sports participant is within the range of ordinary behavior of participants in the sport and therefore reasonable as a matter of law.”
Konopasek v. State, No. 25S03-1012-CR-669, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., May 5, 2011)
When defendant testified he forthrightly had reported the fight he had been in to his probation officer, conveying the impression he was honest with the officer and hence honest generally, the State was entitled to establish a motive to lie about self-defense in the fight by eliciting the fact the defendant was on probation for methamphetamine offenses and faced significant jail time if probation was revoked.