Haymaker v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the purpose of INDIANA CODE § 35-34-1-5(e) is to allow a defendant sufficient time to prepare a defense for an habitual offender charge
• explaining that a defendant’s motion for a speedy trial “does not negate waiver”
• finding defendant’s reliance on Indiana Code section 35-34-1-5(e) was in error when the State was not seeking to add a habitual offender charge, but merely seeking to amend an existing charge
• issue of prejudice due to late amendment of charging information was waived because defendant did not request a continuance after his objection to the amendments was overruled
• defendant waived amendment of information; he did not request a continuance because he wanted to proceed with trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).