Indiana’s anti-Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP) statute protects a person’s actions “in furtherance of” his or her right of petition or free speech and “in connection with a public issue”; the statute is inapplicable to a doctor that reported suspected child abuse.
Supreme
McGrath v. State, No. 49S04-1710-CR-653, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 1, 2018).
Investigation into and observations of the home were “sufficiently indicative of a marijuana grow” when viewed together and in light of the officer’s training. The issuance of a second warrant was proper under the collective knowledge doctrine, which presumes the officer’s credibility so no special showing of reliability was required.
Kirby v. State, No. 18S‐CR‐79, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 27, 2018).
Defendant may not challenge a collateral consequence of an ex post facto statute barring him from school property through a post-conviction proceeding, but he may pursue his claim in a declaratory‐judgment action.
Weida v. State, No. 79S02-1711-CR-00687, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 12, 2018).
The prior version of Sex Offender Special Condition 26, providing a ban on using the internet, is unreasonable since it does not reasonably relate to probationer’s rehabilitation and protecting the public.
Roumbos v. Vazanellis, No. 45S03-1710-CT-635,__ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 12, 2018).
In a legal malpractice case, defendants failed to establish, as a matter of law, that plaintiff would not have succeeded in her underlying premises-liability claim; it is a material-factual dispute that the designated evidence establishes that various wires on a hospital-room floor and the risks they pose would be apparent to a reasonable person.