Bowman v. State, No. 21S04-1510-CR-604, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 26, 2016).

Despite a second baggie of evidence not being tested to prove it was heroin after a first bag of heroin was tested, the evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Sanford v. State, No. 49S05-1604-PC-210, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 27, 2016).

Under the unique circumstances of this case, defendant has permission to file a belated Notice of Appeal under Post-Conviction Rule 2 because the defendant’s failure to file a timely Notice of Appeal was not his fault, and the defendant has been diligent in requesting permission to file a belated Notice of Appeal under the Rule.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Cowans v. State, No. __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 27, 2016). __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 27, 2016).

When being pulled over by the police, a driver does not have full discretion to choose to stop anywhere, but with “adequate justification” might have some discretion to choose the location of a stop. Whether the driver exercises limited discretion in choosing a place to stop should be a question of fact for the jury.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Suggs v. State, No. 02S03-1508-CR-510, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 28, 2016).

The sister of a brother who was once married to the defendant’s aunt is not a “family or household member” within the meaning of the statute elevating misdemeanor battery to a level 6 felony.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Allen v. State, No. 49S05-1601-CR-46, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 28, 2016).

“[W]hether declining to attribute delay to the defendant for failing to arrange for his transportation from Department of Correction custody and to appear for his trial scheduled for January 23, 2013, or whether attributing such failures to the defendant under Rule (C) and permitting the trial court and the State a reasonable time thereafter to bring the defendant to trial, the defendant was entitled to discharge pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 4(C), and his motion should have been granted.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion