Consecutivity for intimidation sentence enhanced with habitual offender status and for “progressive penalty statute” enhanced second-conviction auto theft did not violate the prohibition of “double enhancement” when the enhancements were not based on the same prior felony conviction.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

When victim had come to the fire station on her own and was being treated by firemen, her statements in response to firefighters’ questions were not “testimonial” under the Crawford Confrontation Clause rule.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Holds under the facts in this case that “a 911 recording that involves statements by a caller that were relayed from a victim [were] admissible where the victim had personal knowledge of the underlying incident but the caller did not,” on the basis that the caller’s frame of mind and lack of opportunity to reflect qualified her 911 statements as excited utterances.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Federal sex offender registry statutes and their obligations for defendant did not affect the Indiana law conclusion that a state resident whose out-of-state sex offense conviction predated Indiana sex offender registry statutes could not, under the Indiana Constitution ex post facto Wallace holding, be required to register on the Indiana registry.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Reverses restitution order because it rested solely upon victim’s unsupported assertions of loss as related to probation officer and placed in PSI, and holds State may not have a new restitution hearing to present evidence sufficient to support a restitution award.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion