June 28, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court found that an enhanced sentence for a man convicted of nine counts of molesting his girlfriend’s
young daughter is warranted, but reduced the man’s 324-year sentence to 110 years.
More
June 27, 2011
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge raised six points in a dissent Monday as to why he disagreed with his colleagues’
decision to affirm the revocation of a man’s probation based on the conclusion that the defendant knowingly, intelligently,
and voluntarily waived his right to counsel.
More
June 24, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe mother and daughter who were accused of running a “puppy mill” and had animals removed from their homes as
a result of tax law violations are now suing the Indiana attorney general and others involved in the removal of the dogs.
More
June 23, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court tackled the issue of requests for production of information to private third parties in two opinions
Thursday – one dealing with records sought that fall under the victim-advocate privilege and the other dealing with
unprotected information.
More
June 23, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court addressed the issue of unanimous jury verdicts in child molesting cases Thursday, and adopted reasoning
from the California Supreme Court when dealing with the “either/or” rule in cases where multiple instances are
mentioned but the defendant faces only one charge.
More
June 23, 2011
Jennifer NelsonFollowing a remand from the United States Supreme Court in late 2010, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals admitted it made mistakes
in its recent decision involving a convicted murderer’s appeal and sent the case to the District Court to address habeas
relief claims.
More
June 22, 2011
Jennifer NelsonA divided Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a defendant’s convictions, including attempted battery with a deadly weapon,
finding the state’s explanations for striking the only African-American from the jury were pretextual and purposeful
discrimination.
More
June 22, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has found that a juvenile court didn’t err in admitting a teen’s confession, finding
the boy was given the opportunity for meaningful consultation with his mother and that he knowingly waived his rights. The
justices did also emphasize that the waiver used should be altered to make it more clear.
More
June 22, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe nation’s highest court affirmed an Indianapolis federal judge’s ruling, finding that someone who flees from
police in a vehicle is committing a “crime of violence” that justifies a longer sentence.
More
June 17, 2011
Jenny MontgomeryThe Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled that a man who helped participate in a robbery that left the victim blind must be cleared
of a criminal confinement conviction because the same evidence may have been used to convict him on another charge.
More
June 14, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court handed down two opinions Tuesday in which the defendants, who were found to be incompetent at some
point, argued that pending charges violated their rights to due process on fundamental-fairness grounds.
More
June 14, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with a trial judge that a police officer didn’t have reasonable suspicion to stop
a driver believed to be intoxicated.
More
June 10, 2011
Jennifer NelsonAn Indiana Court of Appeals judge wrote a separate opinion in an unlawful arrest case, emphasizing that the facts before the
court differ from those before the Indiana Supreme Court justices in Barnes v. State.
More
June 9, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe nation’s highest court has upheld an Indianapolis federal judge's ruling, finding that someone who flees from police
in a vehicle is committing a “crime of violence” that justifies a longer sentence.
More
June 8, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Supreme Court caught many people off guard when it abolished the common law right of citizens to reasonably resist
police from entering their homes, no matter the situation and regardless of whether the entry is legal.
More
June 8, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that the Northern District of Indiana was essentially creating a built-in
appeal issue on ineffective assistance of counsel, and it called out a senior judge for violating a man’s Sixth Amendment
right to choose his own lawyer.
More
June 6, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court accepted three cases June 3, including two cases in which the Indiana Court of Appeals were split
in their rulings on a drug case and an insurance case.
More
June 2, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals ordered a new trial for a man convicted of murder because the trial court erred by refusing to
instruct the jury on self-defense without the defendant’s testimony.
More
June 1, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court was divided Wednesday in an opinion regarding whether a man could be charged with Class C felony
child molesting 16 years after he last molested his stepniece.
More
May 31, 2011
Jennifer NelsonIn two cases involving the parental privilege defense, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in favor of a teacher who “flicked”
a special education student’s tongue and against a father hit his daughter numerous times with a belt.
More
May 27, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has decided that a state statute’s indigency hearing requirement doesn’t apply when
a defendant has entered into a cash bail-bond agreement, meaning a trial court can use that bond money to pay court costs
such as the imposed public defender fee.
More
May 26, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court handed down two opinions Thursday afternoon in which the justices found the trial judges involved
erred in modifying the defendants’ sentences from Class D felonies to Class A misdemeanors.
More
May 26, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe man who shot a pregnant teller during a bank robbery, which led to the death of her twins, had his two felony feticide
convictions vacated by the Indiana Court of Appeals because of double jeopardy violations.
More
May 23, 2011
Michael HoskinsAn appellate court has ruled that a senior judge in the Northern District of Indiana violated a man’s Sixth Amendment
rights by not allowing him to proceed to trial with the lawyer of his choosing.
More
May 18, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. Constitution doesn’t prevent the state from retrying a man who was acquitted
by a jury in the murder of one person, but in which the jury couldn’t return a verdict on the defendant's attempted
murder charge of another man, the Indiana Supreme Court held Wednesday.
More
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.
Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.