Crawford v. State, No. 49S05-1106-CR-370, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., June 23, 2011)

“[T]he three-step test for the discoverability of information outlined in State v. Cline (In re WTHR-TV)” applies here to non-privileged video taken by a private entity.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Cundiff v. State, No. 31A05-1008-CR-607, __ N.E.2D __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 23, 2011)

Defendant incarcerated on other charges but released on recognizance on the charges at issue was not eligible for the Criminal Rule 4(B) speedy trial remedy.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Foster v. State, No. 02A03-1010-CR-596, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 10, 2011)

Police had probable cause to believe contraband was in the residence, but a warrantless search violated the Indiana Constitution when “[t]wenty-one days had elapsed since the controlled buy, and there [wa]s no evidence that exigent circumstances called for an immediate arrest.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Curtis v. State, No. 49S02-1010-CR-620, __ N.E.2d __ (June 14, 2011)

“We hold that pending criminal charges do not violate a defendant’s right to due process if (1) the trial court has not involuntarily committed the defendant and (2) the trial court has not made an appropriate finding that the defendant will never be restored to competency. We also hold that . . . the trial court should have granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss and discharge under Indiana Criminal Rule 4(C).”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

J.D.B. v. North Carolina, No. 09–11121, __ U.S. __ (June 16, 2011)

“[T]he age of a child subjected to police questioning is relevant to the custody analysis of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 (1966).”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion