The Indiana Product of Liability Act statute of repose does not apply in cases where there is prolonged exposure to inherently dangerous foreign substances like asbestos.
Supreme
Tyson v. State, No. 45S03-1509-CR-528, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Feb. 25, 2016).
Statute requiring “a person who is required to register as a sex or violent offender in any jurisdiction” to likewise register in Indiana did not violate Indiana ex post facto clause as applied to Texas offender who moved to Indiana after 2006 enactment of that statute. Texas law already required offender to register; maintaining that status in Indiana was not punitive under the intent-effects test.
State v. Zerbe, No. 49S05-1509-MI-529, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Feb. 25, 2016).
Michigan sex offender was not distinguishable from offender in Tyson v. State, even though Michigan enacted its registration requirement two years after defendant’s offense. Relevant question was not whether Michigan registration requirement was ex post facto law, but only that the requirement existed at the time offender moved to Indiana.
Wilford v. State, No. 49S02-1602-CR-110, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Feb. 26, 2016).
Officer’s conclusory testimony failed to establish how his decision to impound a car conformed to an established departmental impound policy; impoundment and subsequent inventory search were therefore invalid.
Ward v. State, No. 49S02-1602-CR-96, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Feb. 19, 2016).
Domestic battery victim’s statements to forensic nurse identifying her attacker were not barred as testimonial hearsay because they were given for “primary purpose” of medical treatment, which includes “safety plan” for discharge.