In an important case decided today by the Indiana Court of Appeals,1 it carefully delineated for attorneys and litigants when and what are the differences between child support and educational expenses and extraordinary educational expenses. Critically, it drew the line where expenses are not related educational expenses.
Generally, divorced parents or those with children born outside of marriage believe their financial duties to children end when they turn 18; but this is not the case if the child has the ... Read More
02
Aug2017
06
Jul2017
On Monday, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided an important case relating to the gun community and criminal defense; it decided and what is deadly force by a “deadly weapon”. In Indiana, the affirmative defense of self-defense may be raised when a person uses deadly force in response to infliction of serious bodily injury from a “deadly weapon”, a forcible felony or to defend one’s home or curtilage.
There is no definition of a “deadly weapon”. However, its use must be threatened or used in a ... Read More
15
Jun2017
The hallmark of justice in our society for serious criminal cases is a jury of one’s peers and a fair and impartial judge. No system is perfect. Human perceptions and job focus can sometimes interfere with a criminal case to such an extent a fair trial is not possible. In a new key criminal case on appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals barred trial in northern Indiana of man who was charged with the shooting death of his wife.1
At the most ... Read More
08
Jun2017
In today’s digital age, a cell phone or hand-held device is basically a sophisticated hand-held computer as well as a primary means of communication. Given this, there is general uniformity in the law that to search a cell phone or computer, the police have to have probable cause and a search warrant, just like your home.
This is guaranteed by state constitutions the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and applies in all states,1 which is important if the state has a ... Read More
30
May2017
In trial court testimony, it is rare that the prosecutor (if the defendant testifies on his or her behalf) or a Plaintiff’s or Defendant’s attorney gets a stunning revelation on cross-examination, such as in the 1992 movie A Few Good Men where the witness on trial in a military court—while enraged on cross—admitted he ordered the “code red” which caused other soldiers to beat up a non-conforming soldier.
Equally, criminals on trial for murder don’t typically admit they killed the ... Read More
16
May2017
Civil appeals are guided by very rigid appellate rules. Generally, missing an appellate deadline precludes a civil appeal. The only remedy is a malpractice action against counsel who failed to advise his or her of the appellate deadline or missed this deadline.
This is unlike criminal appeals, where belated appeals may be allowed due to the potential loss of life and liberty by incarceration. This blog explores a very narrow remedy that the Indiana Court of Appeals and Supreme Court have embraced where the facts of ... Read More
19
Apr2017
As with all cases brought against an individual or family (civil or criminal), the State has the burden of proof. With respect to neglected children (“CHINS”) or children who commit acts that would be crimes (“Juvenile Delinquents”) if an adult, the Indiana Department of Child Services (“DCS”) acts for the State. In a recent case, a divided Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a Child in Need of Services (“CHINS”) determination against a father. This case has three key holdings or points for ... Read More
18
Apr2017
Over time, the nature and complexities of divorce have changed. In the 60s and 70s, for instance, before uniform acts were adopted by the states on custody jurisdiction, a parent wanting to obtain child custody simply went on “vacation” with the children to another state, filed divorce, and had custody decided in a more favorable place to their legal objectives. Laws, lawyers, judges, and legislatures have done a great deal to level the playing field for litigants.
However, there are certain “no-nos” even today ... Read More
23
Mar2017
The Implications of Scotus Riley V. California
Today, more than 90% of American adults carry cell phones (which are really mini-computers) and, by now, most are likely aware that these devices contain a digital record of nearly every aspect of their lives, from the mundane to the intimate. Some may assume this is private, but, the judiciary has helped to preserve our digital privacy, namely the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Riley v. California that is still working its ... Read More
09
Mar2017
Maybe and Maybe Not!
Criminal prosecution and defense, as with the rest of law and society, has become complex. Thus, even routine criminal cases should be pair an accused with an informed and skilled defense counsel. The Indiana Supreme Court’s recent case on Miranda warning in a field sobriety checkpoint reflects this need.
Typically, during any police detainment of any duration and questioning, Miranda warnings apply. However, in State v. Brown, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled consistently with ... Read More