Although they appeared to be sitting side-by-side per usual, the three appellate judges hearing the Indiana Court of Appeals’ first-ever remote oral arguments on Thursday were certainly far apart.
A man who was never given notice of the final dissolution decree ending his marriage secured a reversal from the Indiana Court of Appeals on Wednesday.
The Indiana Court of Appeals on Wednesday was not convinced by a man’s argument that his decades-long sentence for child molesting was inappropriate or that victim testimony was inadmissible.
A man convicted of obstruction of justice following the murder of his stepmom did not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals that his conviction should be vacated based on a detective’s false testimony.
The Indiana Court of Appeals divided Thursday on a woman’s consecutive sentences for drug dealing convictions, with a dissenting judge contending her 24½-year term should be shorter.
A man who filed a medical malpractice claim against a doctor and hospital following his surgery for a herniated disc could not convince the Indiana Court of Appeals that he should be permitted to amend his complaint and add a federal claim.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed the exclusion of real estate and an internet service provider company from the marital assets of a couple in their divorce proceedings, agreeing with a trial court that the challenged assets were actually the property of the husband’s parents.
A split appellate court has affirmed for a southern Indiana property owner in a dispute over a former Indiana University fraternity house after the university decided to no longer recognize the fraternity. In doing so, the panel struck down a local Bloomington ordinance that deferred to IU in regulating fraternities and sororities.
An appellate judge concurring with a one-paragraph opinion in a post-conviction case proposed reordering the way Indiana treats those who are arrested. But Judge Paul Mathias joined with judges Margret Robb and Rudolph Pyle III to affirm the denial of post-conviction relief in Charles E. Barber v. State of Indiana, 19A-PC-1234.
The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed the involuntary temporary commitment for a man found to be gravely disabled and dangerous to himself and others, finding clear and convincing evidence supported the finding.
A man convicted of voyeurism won’t have to register as a sex offender, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled, concluding the man was not convicted of a crime requiring that he do so.
When an Indiana Court of Appeals judge recently veered away from his colleagues’ conclusion that a grieving mother’s statements in a social media post could be constitutionally restricted and prosecuted, he went even further, calling Indiana’s harassment statute unconstitutionally overbroad. Many First Amendment attorneys agree.
A mother who made threatening social media posts toward a police officer after her son’s death has lost an appeal of her harassment conviction. The Indiana Court of Appeals divided on the sufficiency of evidence supporting her conviction, while a dissenting judge also declared the state’s harassment law “unconstitutionally overbroad and facially invalid because it is susceptible of prohibiting protected expression.”
An Indiana Court of Appeals panel has affirmed a sex offender’s seven-year sentence despite his assertions that the sentence was inappropriate, despite a finding that a trial court improperly used the offender’s risk assessment scores as an aggravating factor.
A man convicted in a shooting at a Vigo County McDonald’s has lost his appeal of his criminal recklessness conviction, with the Indiana Court of Appeals rejecting his double jeopardy argument.
A child in need of services case has been dismissed after an appellate panel concluded that a mother’s motion to dismiss because the fact-finding hearing was not completed within the statutory timeframe was incorrectly denied by the trial court.
The grandparents of two children adopted by their unmarried uncle do not have standing to seek visitation, the Indiana Court of Appeals wrote Friday in an opinion rejecting the argument that the children were “born out of wedlock.”
A man who argued his constitutional right to have an intimate relationship with his ex-wife had been violated was denied an appeal of his invasion of privacy conviction when the Indiana Court of Appeals found the privacy statute did not directly interfere with his fundamental rights.