Criminal Confinement

Trial court domestic violence counseling order affirmed

January 10, 2017
Olivia Covington
The Marion Superior Court was within its discretion when it ordered a man to complete domestic violence counseling even though he was not convicted on a domestic battery charge, the Indiana Court of Appeals held Tuesday.
More

Evansville woman accused of beating man into false confession

August 5, 2016
 Associated Press
Southwestern Indiana police say a woman allegedly beat a man with a metal pipe into falsely confessing he was involved in the disappearance of a severely disabled woman.
More

COA agrees state did not interfere with defense

February 25, 2016
Scott Roberts
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a man’s convictions for criminal confinement and domestic battery, among other charges, after it found the state did not interfere by not allowing one of the man’s witnesses to testify.
More

Judge wants harsher sentence for attack on ex-fiancee

December 2, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed there were no double jeopardy violations following a man’s open plea agreement to strangling, confining and battering his ex-fiancee, but one judge believed the man deserved more time in the Department of Correction based on the seriousness of the incident.
More

State performed due diligence charging man in 25-year-old attack

October 8, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
In a matter of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that state employees met the due diligence requirement of I.C. 35-41-4-2 regarding the statute of limitations in charging a man in 2013 for an attack on a 10-year-old girl in 1988.
More

Lack of evidence gets criminal confinement conviction dropped

September 2, 2015
Marilyn Odendahl
A Jefferson County man, convicted of beating up someone who testified against his daughter’s boyfriend, did not confine the victim during the assault, the Indiana Supreme Court has ruled.
More

Convictions based on ‘very same behavior’ do not violate double jeopardy

July 30, 2015
Marilyn Odendahl
A man was unable to overcome heavy precedent and convince the Indiana Supreme Court his convictions violated the state prohibition against double jeopardy.
More

Man’s sentence affirmed despite misapplication of law

June 29, 2015
Dave Stafford
A misapplication of Indiana law in setting a 10-year cap in a plea agreement for a man who admitted to multiple counts of child neglect and criminal confinement doesn’t require reversal, a divided Indiana Supreme Court held Monday.
More

Revised sentence modification statute not applicable in defendant’s case

April 30, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
A trial court did not err in denying a man’s petition to modify his sentence after finding that the current version of the sentencing modification statute is not applicable to his sentence, which he began serving in 1989. The Indiana Court of Appeals panel relied on a January decision by its colleagues to affirm the denial of Mitchell Swallows’ petition.
More

COA reverses confinement conviction, cautions prosecution on future statements

February 5, 2015
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a Lake County man’s Class B felony criminal confinement conviction because the trial court erred in admitting out-of-court statements by an alleged accomplice.
More

Man’s criminal confinement conviction reversed, battery conviction reinstated

February 3, 2015
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals ordered a Class B felony criminal confinement conviction reversed based on insufficient evidence, but judges ordered a battery conviction previously dismissed over double jeopardy concerns reinstated.
More

Justices reverse grant of post-conviction relief

September 18, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a defendant’s claim that his attorneys were ineffective for not arguing that, based on a Supreme Court case, his conviction for Class B felony criminal confinement should be reversed or reduced. But the man inappropriately relies on the case, and what he claims his attorneys should have argued is not the law.
More

Order requiring man to participate in sex offender program not unconstitutional

June 18, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has found that the order requiring a man to participate in the Sex Offender Management and Monitoring program does not violate Indiana’s prohibition of ex post facto laws.
More

Court upholds man’s conviction for confining wife’s sister

June 13, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
Although a prosecutor made an inappropriate comment during a man’s trial for criminal confinement, that comment had little persuasive effect on the jury, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Friday. The judges affirmed Jonathan Stephens’ conviction of Class C felony criminal confinement.
More

Officer’s testimony about victim’s statement admissible, COA rules

June 12, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
A trial court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed an Indianapolis police officer to testify as to a victim’s out-of-court statements made to the officer shortly after an incident where she was beaten up.
More

COA: Man’s sentence after guilty plea is illegal

June 5, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a man’s 10-year sentence resulting from a guilty plea for abusing his adopted teenaged children, holding that the sentence was based on an incorrect application of I.C. 35-50-1-2.
More

Man knowingly waived right to jury trial on all charges

April 10, 2014
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected a defendant’s argument that he only agreed to a bench trial on one of the seven charges he faced following a violent altercation with his girlfriend.
More

3 of former corrections officer’s convictions upheld by appeals court

June 10, 2013
Jennifer Nelson
A former corrections officer at the Marion County Jail who tried to get a co-worker to fool around with him had three of his four convictions stemming from their interactions upheld Monday by the Indiana Court of Appeals. The judges reversed one sexual battery conviction because the proof didn’t support Maurice Frazier’s Class D felony conviction.
More

7th Circuit: ‘Ransom demand’ requires third-party involvement

May 8, 2013
Jennifer Nelson
In order to enhance a criminal sentence on the basis of a ransom demand, that demand must be conveyed to a third-party, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held Wednesday.
More

Judges rule state lacks authority to appeal dismissed case

July 30, 2012
Dave Stafford
The Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed the state’s appeal of a criminal case in which a trial court granted the state’s motion to dismiss.
More

COA reverses conviction based on continuing crime doctrine

April 23, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed one conviction against a man charged with multiple offenses for stabbing his wife.
More

7th Circuit affirms denial of habeas corpus petition

January 31, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
A man who stabbed his wife repeatedly, leaving her with a collapsed lung and ruptured spleen, was unable to prove that he received ineffective counsel at trial, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held.
More

COA vacates conviction on double jeopardy grounds

June 17, 2011
Jenny Montgomery
The 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

COA upholds convictions in Indianapolis Hamilton Ave. murders

April 18, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed a man’s convictions and reduced his sentence to 421 years for his involvement in the gruesome robbery and murders of seven Indianapolis residents, including three children, in June 2006.
More

Court of Appeals to hear arguments in Valparaiso

March 24, 2011
IL Staff
The Indiana Court of Appeals travels to Valparaiso University Monday to hear oral arguments in a criminal case.
More
Page  1 2 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hi there I really need help with getting my old divorce case back into court - I am still paying support on a 24 year old who has not been in school since age 16 - now living independent. My visitation with my 14 year old has never been modified; however, when convenient for her I can have him... I am paying past balance from over due support, yet earn several thousand dollars less. I would contact my original attorney but he basically molest me multiple times in Indy when I would visit.. Todd Woodmansee - I had just came out and had know idea what to do... I have heard he no longer practices. Please help1

  2. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  3. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  4. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  5. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

ADVERTISEMENT