Justices: No error in declaring mistrial
A trial court's determination to discharge a jury at a defendant's second trial wasn't an abuse of discretion,
the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
A trial court's determination to discharge a jury at a defendant's second trial wasn't an abuse of discretion,
the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
The Indiana Supreme Court has decided to not consider a case that justices had granted transfer on late last year, reinstating
a lower appellate court’s ruling that a trial judge had abused her discretion in admitting a blood test in a drunken
driving case.
A Dearborn County commissioner is accusing the county attorney of wrongly accusing two officials of violating federal law
and wants the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission to launch an investigation of its soon-to-be leader who starts
in that office in mid-June.
Upholding a trial court ruling in a case stemming from a construction site accident, the Indiana Supreme Court has offered
guidance for future trials about how juries should calculate a plaintiff’s already-paid compensation benefits when determining
punitive damage awards.
Two former Marion County deputy prosecutors have received public reprimands from the state’s highest court for drunken
driving incidents.
The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted the resignation of an Anderson attorney who faces federal criminal charges for possession
and distribution of child pornography.
For the first time in more than a decade, Indiana’s Supreme Court will find itself searching for a new justice.
Addressing an issue that’s divided the state’s intermediate appeals judges, the Indiana Supreme Court has held
that review under Appellate Rule 7 may include consideration of a person’s total penal consequences within a trial court
sentence.
Indiana Supreme Court Justice Theodore R. Boehm announced today that he is retiring from the state’s highest court on
Sept. 30, 2010.
Fifteen projects in 18 Indiana counties are receiving grants from the Indiana Supreme Court aimed at family court projects,
including Madison and Parke counties that are the newest to join the effort that’s been in place since 1999.
The Indiana Supreme Court Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure is seeking comment through June 20 on several proposed
rule changes.
When he was named to the Madison Circuit bench late last year, Judge Rudolph “Rudy” Pyle III made history in that he became not only the county’s first African-American jurist but also the first Indiana Conference for Legal Education Opportunities graduate to be elevated to the state’s judiciary at that level.
Fifteen projects in 18 Indiana counties are receiving grants from the Indiana Supreme Court aimed at family court projects, including Madison and Parke counties that are the newest to joint the effort that’s been in place since 1999.
In order to increase efficiency and reduce administrative redundancies at the appellate clerk’s office, attorneys and law firms will no longer receive weekly e-mails about cases the Indiana Supreme Court has agreed to consider.
The Indiana Supreme Court has addressed the scope of privilege for plea negotiations for the first time in 20 years, upholding the conviction and sentence of a man who drove his pickup truck into an Evansville school bus while intoxicated and injured more than a dozen children.
The Indiana Supreme Court says that a person or business that buys and later sells a wrecked vehicle must apply for a salvage
title as required by state law, even if that vehicle’s been sold by the time that certificate is received.
State trial courts have until June 15 to apply for grants that would allow them to reform or improve their local judicial
systems.
The Indiana Court of Appeals was hesitant to rely on an Indiana Supreme Court case’s definition of “forcibly
resist” because that language doesn’t appear to adequately describe the meaning of the phrase as it has been recently
applied.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has not had any published or unpublished opinions posted online since May 6.
The Indiana Supreme Court has publicly reprimanded an Indianapolis attorney who responded to harassing phone calls and pre-recorded
messages to her unlisted phone number by asking a company representative if he was “gay” or “sweet.”