Monetary sanctions potentially exceeding $100,000 and default judgment have been entered against state defendants and their attorney in a prisoner case that the presiding federal judge said “shattered” her trust in the defendants’ litigation practices.
Despite multiple 7th Circuit decisions finding police at fault for injuring individuals by excessive handcuffing, a panel from the Chicago court has granted qualified immunity to two Indianapolis police officers in the death of a teenager because none of the previous cases specifically give arrestees the right to not be handcuffed after complaining about difficulty breathing.
Monetary sanctions and default judgment have been entered against state defendants and their attorney in a prisoner case that the presiding federal judge said “shattered” her trust in the defendants’ litigation practices. The judge also imposed new requirements on lawyers in the Indiana Attorney General’s office who defend the Department of Correction in prisoner civil-rights cases.
A man sentenced to die by lethal injection at the federal prison in Terre Haute was denied a stay of execution in federal court Wednesday, narrowing his remaining appeals and potentially setting the stage for his execution scheduled next month to proceed.
The term “excessive fine” is understandable. Unless you are a member of the Indiana Supreme Court. Then, in the context of civil asset forfeiture, the term becomes an enigma to be parsed in three dozen pages of ridiculous legal logic that even one of the five justices confessed he could not comprehend.
An Indiana prison inmate’s lawsuit alleging corrections officers attacked him and then marched him naked down the range at Indiana State Prison to humiliate him may proceed in large part, a federal judge has ruled.
An Indiana civil forfeiture case that made its way to the United States Supreme Court will now return to the Grant Superior Court after the Indiana Supreme Court developed a framework for determining if the forfeiture of property is excessive under the Eighth Amendment.
Although the Marion County Sheriff’s remedy failed to fix a glitch between two different computer systems and caused an inmate to be detained longer than the court had ordered, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the law enforcement agency and the city of Indianapolis were not deliberately indifferent.
A DeKalb County man who as a juvenile pleaded guilty to two murders and was sent to prison for an aggregate 100 years was denied post-conviction relief after the Indiana Court of Appeals found his sentence did not violate constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment because he will be eligible for parole in 2040.
For the third time in three years, Marion resident Tyson Timbs took his case before a Supreme Court. The man whose name became noted civil forfeiture caselaw said after arguments Friday, “I feel like I stand for something now.”
Indiana prosecutors are setting aside their case against two police officers who were caught on video repeatedly punching a handcuffed man so that a federal case against them can proceed.
A California federal appeals court ruling that homeless individuals cannot be criminally charged for sleeping on public property reflected sentiments last fall that helped stop a proposed Indianapolis ordinance that barred people from sitting or lying on public property during certain hours.
The US Supreme Court decision in a landmark Indiana civil forfeiture case ruled that the Eighth Amendment Excessive Fines Clause is incorporated to the states, but Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s opinion declined to answer one key question: When does the Eighth Amendment prohibit civil forfeiture?
In another dispute in an Indiana civil forfeiture case, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has denied issuing an opinion on a district court ruling that found parts of the state statute unconstitutional, finding the lower court was not given a chance to address the state’s effort to fix the problem.
The Eighth Amendment’s protection against excessive fines has been incorporated to the states via the 14th Amendment, the Supreme Court of the United States has unanimously ruled in deciding an Indiana civil forfeiture case that posed the question.
A former Department of Correction nurse who treated an inmate now suing DOC for excessive force was on the stand in federal court Tuesday, facing possible sanctions after she allegedly submitted false statements claiming to be unaware of the inmate’s accusations.
Two Indianapolis attorneys accused of filing false declarations on behalf of their state clients in an inmate’s excessive force lawsuit are facing federal court sanctions for the alleged misconduct, though the attorneys claim the issues giving rise to the court’s concerns were the result of honest mistakes.
Finding it is reasonable to infer that a former unit manager at the Putnamville Correctional Facility knew an inmate was in danger from gang violence but did nothing, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a grant of summary judgment and remanded the case to the Southern Indiana District Court.
Marion resident Tyson Timbs never expected to be the face of civil forfeiture reform at the United States Supreme Court. Several times during his five-year legal battle, Timbs wanted to throw in the towel. Sometimes, all he wanted was to put his past trouble with the law behind him. But he also said he wanted to fight against what he views as widespread unjust civil forfeiture practices.
WASHINGTON — The grandeur and history of the United States Supreme Court stood in stark contrast to the small-town Indiana roots of a potentially landmark civil forfeiture case federal justices heard Wednesday.