<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Indiana Criminal Law &#187; Indiana Supreme Court</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.incrimlaw.org/category/published-opinions/supreme/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org</link>
	<description>Created &#38; maintained by Youngcourt Law Office, Huron, Indiana.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:24:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Traffic stop based on random license plate check</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1125/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1125/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:24:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Armfield v. State, 29S02-0811-CR-590
12-18-09, Ind.
Attorney: Taffanee Keys
Holding:          Trial court properly denied the Defendant&#8217;s motion to suppress. Resolving a split in the appellate courts, Court held that an officer has reasonable suspicion to initiate a Terry stop when: (1) the officer knows that the registered owner of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1125/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Traffic stop based on random license plate check</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1122/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1122/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:23:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Holly v. State, 49S01-0811-CR-591
12-18-09, Ind.
Attorney: Timothy Burns
Holding:          Trial court erred by denying Defendant&#8217;s motion to suppress.  An officer has reasonable suspicion to initiate a Terry stop when: (1) the officer knows that the registered owner of a vehicle has a suspended license and (2) the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1122/traffic-stop-based-on-random-license-plate-check/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Prior rape conviction inadmissible under intent exception to Ind. Evid.R. 404(b)</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1114/prior-rape-conviction-inadmissible-under-intent-exception-to-ind-evid-r-404b/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1114/prior-rape-conviction-inadmissible-under-intent-exception-to-ind-evid-r-404b/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lafayette v. State, 45S03-0904-CR-182
12-08-09, Ind.
Attorney: Mark A. Bates
Holding:          In rape prosecution, trial court erred in admitting testimony about Defendant’s prior attempted rape conviction under the intent exception to Ind. Evidence Rule 404(b), because Defendant did not present a claim of particular contrary intent by claiming intercourse [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1114/prior-rape-conviction-inadmissible-under-intent-exception-to-ind-evid-r-404b/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Untimely appeal of probation revocation</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1087/untimely-appeal-of-probation-revocation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1087/untimely-appeal-of-probation-revocation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:09:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1087</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cooper v. State, 49S02-0904-CR-135
12-09-09, Ind.
Attorney: Ann M. Sutton; Bryan Lee Ciyou
Holding:          A defendant must file either a notice of appeal or a motion to correct error no later than thirty days after a final appealable order is issued. Ind. Appellate Rule 9(A)(1).  However, an appellate [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/03/01/1087/untimely-appeal-of-probation-revocation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wiretaps &#8211; pre-implementation appellate review requirement</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1036/wiretaps-pre-implementation-appellate-review-requirement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1036/wiretaps-pre-implementation-appellate-review-requirement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:59:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1036</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Haldeman, 55S00-0906-CR-266
01-15-10, Ind.
Attorney: Terry Iacoli
Holding:               Repealing of I.C. § 35-33.5-1-1, which required State to seek ex parte de novo review from Court of Appeals before implementing wiretap warrants, did not invalidate Criminal Rule 25 and the process it established [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1036/wiretaps-pre-implementation-appellate-review-requirement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Theft &#8211; unexplained possession insufficient evidence</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1021/theft-unexplained-possession-insufficient-evidence/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1021/theft-unexplained-possession-insufficient-evidence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1021</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fortson v. State, 82S04-0811-CR-592 
01-21-10, Ind
Attorney: Matthew McGovern
Holding:               Mere unexplained possession of stolen property is no longer sufficient for conviction of theft, overruling forty-year rule allowing theft conviction under such circumstances.  See Bolton v. State, 254 Ind. 648, 261 N.E.2d [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1021/theft-unexplained-possession-insufficient-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sex offender registry and 1000 feet &#8211; ex post facto</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1015/sex-offender-registry-and-1000-feet-ex-post-facto/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1015/sex-offender-registry-and-1000-feet-ex-post-facto/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=1015</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hevner v. State, 27S02-1001-CR-5
12-9-09, Ind.
Attorney: David Payne
Holding:               As applied to Hevner, amendment to I.C. 11-8-8-4.5 requiring person with only one conviction for possession of child pornography to register as a sex offender violates state constitution’s prohibition on ex post facto laws [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2010/02/26/1015/sex-offender-registry-and-1000-feet-ex-post-facto/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Guilty plea-  condition that D may appeal the denial of a motion to suppress is unenforceable</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/09/21/931/guilty-plea-condition-that-d-may-appeal-the-denial-of-a-motion-to-suppress-is-unenforceable/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/09/21/931/guilty-plea-condition-that-d-may-appeal-the-denial-of-a-motion-to-suppress-is-unenforceable/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:06:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=931</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alvey v. State, 82S01-0902-CR-66
08-24-09, Ind. 
Attorney: Michael Keating; Yvette LaPlante

Holding:          A trial court lacks the authority to allow defendants the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress evidence when a defendant enters a guilty plea, even where a plea agreement maintains that such [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/09/21/931/guilty-plea-condition-that-d-may-appeal-the-denial-of-a-motion-to-suppress-is-unenforceable/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Breath test results &#8211; incorrect timestamp on evidence ticket</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/903/breath-test-results-incorrect-timestamp-on-evidence-ticket/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/903/breath-test-results-incorrect-timestamp-on-evidence-ticket/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:57:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=903</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Cioch, 79S05-0902-CR-00092
07-01-09, Ind. 908 N.E.2d 1154
Attorney: Matthew S. Sandy; Teri A. Cummins
Holding:      Trial court erred in suppressing breath test results merely because of an inaccurate timestamp on breath test printout.  The breath test machine had not yet been adjusted to reflect daylight savings time and police officer [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/903/breath-test-results-incorrect-timestamp-on-evidence-ticket/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Persons serving life sentences prior to 1979 not eligible for parole</title>
		<link>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/867/persons-serving-life-sentences-prior-to-1979-not-eligible-for-parole/</link>
		<comments>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/867/persons-serving-life-sentences-prior-to-1979-not-eligible-for-parole/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:38:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indiana Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://incrimlaw.org/?p=867</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[State v. Hernandez, 45S00-0806-CR-377
07-30-09, Ind. 
Attorney: Mark Small

Holding:      Defendant, who is serving two life sentences for his 1975 murder convictions, is not eligible to seek parole under the statutes in effect at the time the murders took place, but can seek clemency through the Indiana Parole Board as many individuals [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.incrimlaw.org/2009/08/18/867/persons-serving-life-sentences-prior-to-1979-not-eligible-for-parole/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

