Indiana Court of Appeals

Man's suit filed after all statutes of limitations

June 9, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed a Logansport resident has standing to sue his city over the operation and management of a city park, but that his suit is barred by statutes of limitations.
More

5 appeals judges up for retention

June 3, 2010
Michael HoskinsMore

Court sets drug-court termination requirements

May 28, 2010
Elizabeth Brockett
An Indiana Court of Appeals ruling today sets requirements for drug court terminations after a man’s participation was terminated without minimum due process.
More

COA: Breathalyzer certificate is not testimonial

May 28, 2010
Rebecca Berfanger
For the first time since the Supreme Court of the United States’ 2009 ruling that found a defendant had a Sixth Amendment right to confront the analysts who prepared lab certificates certifying the defendant had cocaine, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that a trial court did not violate the defendant’s right to confrontation by allowing the inspection certificate for a breathalyzer into evidence, even though the certifier of the equipment did not testify at trial.
More

Justices vacate transfer grant, reinstate COA ruling

May 27, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has decided to not consider a case that justices had granted transfer on late last year, reinstating a lower appellate court’s ruling that a trial judge had abused her discretion in admitting a blood test in a drunken driving case.
More

Court rejects stale trash evidence argument

May 26, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Court of Appeals has rejected an argument that evidence found in a trash search was stale because no other garbage had been collected in the past two weeks and that seized material could have been too old.
More

Debate swirls around citations, use of the NFPRestricted Content

May 26, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Envision a world in which lawyers successfully defended a client on what all parties thought was a significant legal issue, but future attorneys couldn't use that case result to help persuade judges in their litigation.
More

Attorneys say ruling confuses discovery regarding expert materialsRestricted Content

May 26, 2010
Michael Hoskins
A liability lawsuit filed by the victims of a water-heater explosion a year after the May 2004 blast has erupted in its own metaphorical explosion of discovery disputes.
More

Sexually violent predator petitions must be refiled

May 24, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The status as a sexually violent predator for two inmates stands for now, but the Indiana Court of Appeals directed the men to refile their motions to remove that status pursuant to the recently amended statute dealing with this issue.
More

COA upholds 125-year child-molesting sentence

May 19, 2010
Michael Hoskins
In upholding multiple child-molesting convictions and a 125-year sentence, the Indiana Court of Appeals has rejected a woman’s argument about why her penalty should be reduced based in part on the very young ages of the victims.
More

Court: Police shouldn't have made traffic stop

May 19, 2010
Michael Hoskins
An appellate decision today in a drunk-driving traffic stop case out of Fort Wayne illustrates how a lack of knowledge about a particular road’s layout can derail the prosecution of someone who may have been intoxicated behind the wheel.
More

Court rules on sex offender status decisions

May 17, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Tackling the issue of who determines whether a convicted sex offender is considered a “sexually violent predator,” the Indiana Court of Appeals today issued the latest ruling in a line of cases about the state’s sex offender registry and how convicts’ names are removed.
More

COA affirms resisting police conviction

May 13, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was hesitant to rely on an Indiana Supreme Court case’s definition of “forcibly resist” because that language doesn’t appear to adequately describe the meaning of the phrase as it has been recently applied.
More

Mom may be liable for daughter's accident

May 12, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals judges agreed that a mother may possibly be liable for her daughter’s accident in which she struck a pedestrian with her car after drinking and talking on her cell phone at the time of the accident. The judges didn’t completely agree as to why the mother may be liable.
More

Fees updated for appellate courts

May 12, 2010
IL Staff
The Indiana Supreme Court published an order April 26 on the fees the state's appellate courts clerk can charge for miscellaneous services.
More

No opinions for 3rd day in a row

May 11, 2010
The Indiana Court of Appeals has not had any published or unpublished opinions posted online since May 6.
More

Sex offender may file to take name off registry

May 6, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals determined a convicted sex offender may petition to remove his name from the registry, but he filed his petition in the wrong court.
More

Opinion rules on 2 issues of first impression

May 5, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was faced with two issues of first impression in one opinion – the meaning of Indiana Code Section 27-9-3-34(d) and whether a party is entitled to a jury trial for disputes concerning claims in liquidation proceedings.
More

Majority upholds violent sexual predator finding

May 5, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
An Indiana Court of Appeals panel disagreed as to whether the failure of a defendant’s counsel to press for the statutory requirement for a hearing on a sexually violent predator finding was a procedural default that waived the appellate court’s consideration of the issue.
More

Judges affirm juvenile placement in DOC

April 30, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals was sympathetic to a teen’s request to not be placed in the Department of Correction, but it noted that all other remedies for his rehabilitation had been exhausted in his home county.
More

COA: Judge should have recused himself

April 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with a defendant that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because his attorney should have filed a motion for change of judge. The sentencing judge had worked as a prosecutor in the early stages of the defendant’s case 10 years earlier.
More

Judges reverse, reinstate sex-offender conviction

April 29, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a man’s conviction of failing to register as a sex offender based on a lack of evidence showing the man had a connection to Indiana 90 days after his last registration. The appellate court did reinstate a vacated conviction for failing to notify law enforcement of his move within 72 hours.
More

Pro se defendant must be advised of rights

April 28, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
The requirement to advise a defendant of the dangers of self-representation and the benefit of counsel applies equally regardless of whether a pro se defendant is choosing to plead guilty or go to trial, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today.
More

COA upholds eviction action

April 26, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A trial court properly treated a couple's action against the man who agreed to purchase a house from them as an eviction, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded. The court also analyzed for the first time the nature and effect of a pre-closing possession agreement like the one in the instant case.
More

Court split on burglary tipster issue

April 22, 2010
Jennifer Nelson
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed today as to whether the fact a tipster's identity was known by police was sufficient by itself to justify a police officer's stop of a juvenile.
More
Page  << 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 >> pager
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT