“Rent-to-buy” agreement was not a land-sale contract, but a rental agreement subject to Indiana’s residential landlord-tenant statutes.
Supreme
Faith v. State, No. 19S-PC-499, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 6, 2019).
A trial court may impose consecutive advisory sentences in a case involving multiple acts of child molestation against a single victim.
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.
Rodriguez v. State, No. 18S-CR-143, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug, 7, 2019).
Courts may modify a sentence only if the new sentence would not have violated the terms of the valid plea agreement had the new sentence been originally imposed
State v. Stafford, No. 39S04-1712-CR-749, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 7, 2019).
Companion case to Rodriguez v. State reaffirming that trial courts are bound by the terms of a plea agreement and may only modify a sentence in a way that would have been authorized at the time of sentencing.