Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Ind. Decisions - Court granted transfer in 4 cases last Thursday
The formal transfer list should follow later this week, but the ILB has received notice of four transfers granted last Thursday, August 14th. None of them were on the Clerk's list, issued late Friday.
One we've already posted about (and here also), Indiana Attorney General v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc., because the AG issued a press release last Friday. The COA ruling was issued March 12.
The second is City of East Chicago, Indiana v. East Chicago Second Century, Inc.. See ILB on the Dec. 21, 2007 COA ruling here.
Filter Specialists, Inc. v. Dawn Brooks, Charmaine Weathers, and Michigan City Human Rights Commission, a Dec. 28, 2007 2-1, 56-page opinion - see ILB summary here, about half-way down the page.
Finally, the recently decided Richard Pendergrass v. State of Indiana (7/8/08) - where the COA held: "Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the trial court properly admitted State’s Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 and related testimony concerning DNA analysis and the subsequent test result without the testimony of the laboratory technician who performed the actual testing; and Pendergrass’ confrontational rights pursuant to the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution were not implicated when he was denied the opportunity to confront and cross-examine the laboratory technician who performed the DNA analysis. Affirmed."
The case name may be familiar because it was cited in another COA opinion, Ricky L. Jackson v. State of Indiana (see ILB entry here, 2nd case), issued by a different panel Aug. 12:
Thus, we reject the State’s contention that the Certificate of Analysis is admissible under the business record exception to the hearsay rule under Indiana Evidence Rule 803. Cf. Pendergrass v. State, 889 N.E.2d 861 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (holding Confrontation Clause inapplicable to use of Certificate of Analysis pertaining to DNA test where Certificate used to provide context for expert’s testimony, not to prove element of charged crime), trans. pending. Neither is the Certificate admissible through Ballard’s [the lab supervisor] expert testimony under Indiana Evidence Rule 703. Jackson’s Sixth Amendment right to confrontation is not subordinate to a rule of evidence under the circumstances of this case. As the Court stated in Crawford, “[w]here testimonial statements are involved, we do not think the Framers meant to leave the Sixth Amendment’s protection to the vagaries of the rules of evidence[.]” 541 U.S. at 61. In sum, the Court in Crawford rejected “reliable hearsay” as a substitute for the right of confrontation. See Giles, 128 S. Ct. at 2695 (Souter, J., concurring in part). Jackson’s conviction must be reversed.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 19, 2008 10:29 AM
Posted to Indiana Transfer Lists