Wilkins v. State, No. 02S03-1010-CR-604, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., May 10, 2011)

Police had sufficient reasons to execute search warrant without knocking and announcing, and in any event the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule is not applied to decisions not to knock and announce.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Suarez v. State, No. 02A05-1008-PC-508, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 10, 2011)

Defendant should have been provided with a copy of the in-court recording of Spanish interpreter’s guilty plea hearing translations for the defendant, after counsel had detected an irregularity in the translation when listening to the recording.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

City of Indianapolis, et al v. Armour, et al, No. 49S02-1007-CV-402, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., May 10, 2011)

A city resolution which only forgave outstanding assessment balances, and did not refund assessment money to those that paid the assessment, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it was rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Nichols v. State, No. 29A04-1008-CR-589, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 29, 2011)

Statute, not the trial court or the DOC, determines length of a sex offender’s sex registry obligations.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Nicholson v. State, No. 55A01-1005-CR-251, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 29, 2011)

Single phone call was not “repeated or continuing harrassment” required for stalking, and even if phone calls from period two years’ earlier were considered this element was not proven.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion