In a case of first impression, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions a trial court’s modification
of a criminal sentence from a Class D felony to a Class A misdemeanor nine years after the appellee-defendant pleaded guilty
to operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed today the denial of a mentally ill man’s motion to dismiss charges against him
because not dismissing the charges was a violation of his due process rights.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals expanded caselaw today when ruling on a defendant’s request for new counsel.
The Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with a defendant that his due process rights were denied when his participation in a drug
court program was ended without giving him notice of a hearing, or allowing him to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses.
A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges each wrote their own opinion on whether a police officer’s safety concerns
were legitimate enough to allow the officer to search a car after a traffic stop.
Addressing for the issue for the first time, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the “ostrich instruction”
in context of 18 U.S.C. Section 2422(b) was not appropriately given to the jury in an enticement of a minor trial.
A trial court is the proper authority to determine credit if a defendant earns educational credit time prior to sentencing,
the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled today.
Defendants are entitled to a competency hearing as part of their due process rights, the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded
today, addressing the issue for the first time.
A man’s claims of federal and state double-jeopardy violations were rejected today by the Indiana Court of Appeals,
which affirmed the trial court in a case involving multiple child pornography videos.
A trial court erred in excluding testimony of a defendant’s witnesses on the ground they were alibi witnesses, the Indiana
Court of Appeals ruled today in an issue of first impression.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed a man’s drunk driving and marijuana possession convictions based on police
officer conduct, finding that the officer shouldn’t have held a gun and handcuffed him during what could have been a
legitimate traffic stop.
The Indiana Supreme Court has ordered a new trial for a convicted child molester because of the conduct from the longtime
trial judge, who resigned from the bench in September amid a judicial misconduct investigation.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a Class A felony conviction of dealing in cocaine because the trial court instructed
the jury on an incorrect version of the statute that allows for enhancing dealing convictions.
A man claiming he proved he was unable to pay child support because of his numerous incarcerations did not convince the Indiana
Court of Appeals. In its ruling today, the court relied on Becker v. Becker to affirm the man’s conviction
of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.
The entry by police into a man’s apartment based on uncorroborated information from an anonymous source violated the
man’s federal and state constitutional rights, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Wednesday. Because of this, the drugs
found in the man’s apartment must be suppressed.
A decade-old old case from the Indiana Court of Appeals doesn’t apply to child molesting cases, the state’s second
highest appellate court has ruled.
The Indiana Supreme Court issued a pair of short per curiam opinions on Thursday afternoon that adopt what the Indiana Court
of Appeals decided on two criminal appeals.
The state presented sufficient evidence to prove a defendant delivered and possessed methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of
a family housing complex, so the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed elevating his convictions to a higher felony level.
A trial court didn’t abuse its discretion when it admitted transcripts translated into English of drug transactions
recorded in Spanish because the jury wouldn’t be able to understand the recording, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
Ruling on an issue of first impression, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals today extended the logic of an eight-year-old case
to how criminal defendants challenge their supervised release and revocation penalties and what must be discussed in attorney
withdraw briefs on those issues.