Theft and auto theft are distinct offenses defined in different statutes, so that the “single larceny” rule does not prohibit convictions for both when the defendant simultaneously takes an automobile and other items of property.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Father did not have standing to object to admission of his stepson’s police statement on the basis that the officers had not followed the juvenile waiver of rights statute before questioning the stepson. Indiana Constitution’s Art. 1, § 11 search provision was violated when police officer read text messages on defendant’s cellphone at the time the officer seized the phone in a search incident to arrest.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

If a proposed medical malpractice complaint is filed before the Indiana Department of Insurance without filing fees, it can be treated as unfiled until the fees are paid, or it can be treated as filed and a show cause order can be issued to the plaintiffs that they must pay the fee “in short order.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Admission of in-court field test for marijuana was error under Ev. Rule 702, as the field-tester did not testify as to the “specific name or otherwise identify the test, indicate its reliability or rate of accuracy or error, note the scientific principles on which it is based, or recognize any standards regarding its use and operation.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

“We therefore conclude that the Indiana pre-tax sale notice statute violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it does not require the government to provide sufficient notice prior to the tax sale either by mail or by personal service to mortgagees who have publicly recorded mortgages, even if such notice is not requested by the mortgagees, and because it provides that, even if the government fails to mail the requested notice or the notice is undeliverable for some reason, the validity of the tax sale will not be affected.”

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion