Opinions Aug. 18, 2023

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Vincent S. Horns v. State of Indiana
22A-CR-2813
Criminal. Affirms Vincent Horns’ convictions of Level 6 leaving the scene of an accident and Level 6 obstruction of justice, and his aggregate sentence of four years. Finds the evidence was sufficient to support Horns’ convictions in the Hendricks Circuit Court. Also finds the sentence is not inappropriate.

Ladarryl A. Holland v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-430
Criminal. Affirms Ladarryl Holland’s conviction for Class A operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a person. Finds the evidence was sufficient to support Holland’s conviction in the Marion Superior Court.

In Re: The Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.W. and I.D. (Minor Children); C.W. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
23A-JT-150
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the termination of C.W.’s parental rights. Finds DCS did not violate C.W.’s due process rights. Also finds sufficient evidence to support the terminations in the Madison Circuit Court.

Jamar Minor v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-PC-1207
Post conviction relief. Affirms the denial of Jamar Minor’s petition for post-conviction relief. Finds Minor’s counsel were not ineffective for failing to call particular witnesses at trial. Also finds Minor did not show a reasonable probability that the result of the proceeding would have been different by impeaching a defective. Also finds the Marion Superior Court did not clearly err in concluding trial counsels’ decision not to request an involuntary manslaughter instruction did not constitute deficient performance. Also finds Minor was not placed in a position of grave peril because there is not a reasonable probability the jury would have convicted Minor of reckless homicide but for the state’s inappropriate comment. Also finds Minor failed to meet his burden to show there is a reasonable probability the result of the proceeding would have been different had trial counsel mentioned a fact one more time during closing argument. Also finds Minor is entitled to no relief on his claim of cumulative error. Also finds the post-conviction court did not clearly err in determining counsel’s performance at sentencing was not deficient. Also finds the post-conviction court did not err in denying Minor relief on his claim that appellate counsel was ineffective. Finally, finds because no objection was made at trial on due process and the issue was not presented as fundamental error on direct appeal, the claim of error is foreclosed on post-conviction.