Defendant’s question to detective on cross as to whether defendant admitted any of the allegations against him during detective’s interview opened the door to State questions eliciting from detective that defendant had neither admitted nor denied any allegations.
T. Crone
Webster v. Walgreen, Co. No. 55A01-1110-CT-442, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 4, 2012).
“’[M]ailing’ for purposes of the Indiana Trial Rules requires the sender to affix sufficient postage.”
Bunch v. State, No. 16A05-1007-PC-439, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 21, 2012).
Expert “fire victim toxicology analysis” testimony, developed as scientifically reliable after defendant’s arson felony murder trial, constituted newly discovered evidence and warranted a new trial.
Berryhill v. Parkview Hosp., No. 02A04-1108-SC-40, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 16, 2012).
In detaining an individual, “security guards ‘act[ed] according to’ Indiana Code Article 12-26, which governs the voluntary and involuntary treatment of mentally ill individuals, and ‘assist[ed] in the detention, care, and treatment of an individual alleged … to have a mental illness’ for purposes of Indiana Code Section 12-26-2-6(a)” and are entitled to immunity from the individual’s false imprisonment claim.
Anderson v. State, No. 49A05-1105-CR-243, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2012).
DNA felony conviction swab statute’s “mistake” exception applied to probation officer’s taking of cheek swab from defendant when abstract of judgment officer had indicated a D felony conviction, with no mention of alternative misdemeanor sentencing.