Articles

Supreme Court takes public intoxication case

The Indiana Supreme Court will rule on whether a woman’s conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication should be reversed because she wasn’t in a public place within the meaning of Indiana Code at the time police stopped her car. This issue divided the Indiana Court of Appeals, which reversed Brenda Moore’s conviction.

Read More

State urges SCOTUS to deny judicial canons case

The Indiana Attorney General’s Office has filed a brief with the nation’s highest court, urging the justices to not hear a case about whether Indiana’s judicial canons constitutionally infringe on the free speech rights of those on or vying for seats on the bench.

Read More

3 judges dissent on rehearing denial in stun belt case

The full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to not rehear an Indiana case about a convicted murder’s ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims relating to a stun belt used in court, though three judges disagreed and felt the northern Indiana federal judge’s decision should be upheld.

Read More

Judges reverse dismissal of application to adjust claim

The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the decision by the full Worker’s Compensation Board that a medical services provider’s application for an adjustment of claim was barred by the two-year statute of limitations found in Indiana Code Section 22-3-3-3. The appellate court relied on a recent decision involving a similar scenario to make its ruling.

Read More

Ongoing appeal could impact IMPD officer’s case

An Indiana Court of Appeals decision from last fall could prove to be a game-changer for how the state’s largest county handles the high-profile prosecution of a police officer accused of drunk driving that resulted in one death and other injuries.

Read More

New Supreme Court lineup could change pro se case outcome

The Indiana Supreme Court is thinking about rehearing a case it ruled on four months ago, in which a majority at the time created a new rule but offered no guidance for trial judges on informing future defendants about the dangers of proceeding pro se.

Read More

Last day for legislators to file bills

Today is the deadline for state senators to file Senate bills to be considered during the 2011 session. State representatives’ deadline for filing House bills was Tuesday and they have until today to file vehicle bills.

Read More

Order addresses selection of special judges

To allow time for counties to amend their local rules to conform with Indiana Administrative Rule 3 regarding the selection of special judges, the Indiana Supreme Court has issued an order establishing temporary procedures for selecting these judges.

Read More

Judges differ in interpretation of earlier ruling

A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges disagreed today as to whether a man's convictions of attempted sexual misconduct with a minor and attempted dissemination of matter harmful to minors should be reversed because his intended victim was actually a police officer conducting an online sting operation.

Read More

Longtime Indy attorney dies

Merrill Moores, who loved the law and mentoring young attorneys, died Jan. 5. Moores is the father of a Marion County juvenile judge and an Indianapolis attorney.

Read More

SCOTUS declines to consider Indiana case

The nation’s highest court has refused to consider an Indiana case involving whether a defendant’s no contest plea to an out-of-state murder can be used to qualify him as a serious violent felon on a conviction here.

Read More

Judges reverse man’s removal from sex offender list

A trial court erred in ordering a man’s name removed from the state’s sex offender registry because the court didn’t provide notice to the appropriate parties or hold a hearing before doing so, ruled the Indiana Court of Appeals.

Read More

COA finds inmate’s post-conviction relief process ‘confusing’

The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the denial of a pro se inmate’s petition for permission to file a belated appeal after his post-conviction relief petition was denied, finding the chronological cases summary to contain inconsistencies. The judges also noted that this particular court has a “documented history” of not organizing and keeping abreast of its post-conviction relief files.

Read More