Butler V. State, No. 84A01-1008-CR-414, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 27, 2011)

Greer v. State’s holding, that a probationer who proceeds pro se and admits the petition need not be advised of the “pitfalls of self-representation,” applies despite decision in Hopper v. State requiring guilty plea advice of dangers of proceeding pro se and “that an attorney is usually more experienced in plea negotiations and better able to identify and evaluate any potential defenses and evidentiary or procedural problems in the prosecution’s case.”

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

Mitchell v. State, No. 49A02-1003-CR-340, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 6, 2011)

Traditional rule that a post-conviction court may not take judicial of the transcript in the original proceedings appears to have been ended by the 2010 amendment to Evidence Rule 201(b)(5) allowing judicial notice of “records of a court of this state,” but since petitioner did not request judicial notice and court did not sua sponte take it the transcript was not in evidence in the post-conviction proceeding.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Burke v. State, No. 49A02-1006-CR-660, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 21, 2011)

Sentence enhancement for burglary of a structure used for religious worship does not violate federal Constitution’s Establishment Clause or Indiana Constitution’s prohibition of government preference for a particular religion.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

State v. Laker, No. 24A04-0912-CR-736, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2010)

Operating a farm tractor while intoxicated is an operating while intoxicated offense, but operating a farm tractor while driving privileges are suspended is not an offense.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion