“[W]here the possibility exists that a defendant accused of OWI may at some point in the future regain competency and be released back into society, which release also may include the defendant driving, the State may pursue an OWI conviction even if the defendant’s incompetency caused he or she to be detained for a period in excess of the maximum possible sentence for OWI.”
Dan Cristiani Excavating Co. Inc. v. Money, No. 10A05-1002-CT-114, __ N.E. 2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 26, 2010)
A series of adverse rulings against one party is not a pattern indicating bias without a demonstration of actual personal bias of the trial judge.
After judge had instructed parties a request would be necessary to have sidebars recorded due to limitations of recording equipment, defense counsel’s failure to request a recorded sidebar conference meant that the record failed to show the particular grounds for his objection to evidence.
At State’s request in a community corrections revocation based on defendant’s commission of a new crime, trial judge properly took judicial notice under Ev. Rule 201(b) of records of town court showing defendant’s new conviction in that court.
When defendant was convicted of reckless homicide entailing use of a shotgun resulting in the death, imposition of the five year statutory sentence enhancement for use of a firearm did not violate double jeopardy protections.