Bex v. State, No. 53A01-1008-CR-422, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2011).

Federal Constitution permits trial by a jury of five when a jury of six is provided for by law, without alternates by agreement, and, due to an emergency, a juror is excused; consent to trial by five under such circumstances may be given by counsel, as a matter of trial strategy.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Gilmore v. State, No. 40A01-1011-CR-553, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2011).

After defendant had initially been found indigent and a reassessment of indigence elicited no evidence of a change in financial status, the trial court’s statement that an evaluation of defendant’s behavior (which had been obstreperous) was also relevant to indigence prompted an appellate finding the trial judge abused his discretion in finding the defendant to no longer be indigent; trial court’s finding that the defendant had forfeited his right to appointed counsel by his conduct was reversed on the basis that, without a hearing warning defendant that his conduct could result in loss of appointed counsel, the defendant could not be said to have made a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel by his conduct.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

C.S. v. State, No. 67A01-1101-JS-19, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 17, 2011).

Evidence that child skipped one day of school, missed part of five classes, was tardy twelve times and that his mother had cooperated with school and disciplined him did not suffice to raise the required status delinquency inference he was not receiving care, treatment, or rehabilitation.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Cartwright v. State, No. 82A01-1005-CR-214, __ N.E.2D __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 22, 2011)

Finds the State’s four race-neutral reasons for peremptory challenge to only African-American venireperson to have been pretextual because the trial judge made no finding which of the four reasons it relied on to reject the Batson challenge and because the State failed to “develop anything beyond the most superficial of records regarding its reasons.”

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