When parolee’s conviction had been for a sex crime against an adult female, parole conditions that he refrain from contact with his wife and his children were impermissible as they had no reasonable relation to his rehabilitation. Also, affirms Court of Appeals holding that statutes categorizing parolee as an “offender against children” because his conviction made him a “sexually violent predator” were overbroad as applied and that the “offender against children” status could not be imposed without some prior due process. Concludes that DOC’s SOMM (Sex Offender Management and Monitoring Program) requirements do not violate a participant’s privilege against self-incrimination.
Life without parole sentencing order did not improperly rely upon non-statutory aggravating factors; instead, it explained why the mitigating factors did not outweigh the single statutory aggravating factor alleged and proved.
In re Order for Payment of Attorney Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses, No. 48A02-1307-MI-615, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 9, 2014).
State’s obligation to pay costs of representing inmates in prosecutions for offenses committed in correctional facilities includes not just trial expenses but also expenses for appellate representation.
When a blood draw warrant had been issued for a driver who had refused a breath test, the driver’s refusal to cooperate with the blood draw was properly found to be indirect criminal contempt.
“Hybrid” sentence partially concurrent and partially consecutive is not authorized by statute.