Sharply divided Supreme Court sides with smartphone owner in self-incrimination case
A harshly split Indiana Supreme Court has ruled 3-2 in favor of a woman who was found in contempt for refusing to unlock her smart phone in a criminal investigation. A majority of the high court reversed the contempt order, holding in a landmark ruling that forcing her to unlock her iPhone would violate her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.Read More
A woman holding more than a decadelong grudge against a former sheriff cannot shake her conviction for felony stalking after she berated the man and followed him around town for years.
A pair of protective orders issued against two brothers by a classmate have been reversed after the Court of Appeals of Indiana determined the defendants weren’t given an impartial hearing and were denied due process by the Lawrence Circuit Court.
Despite a victim’s claim on the stand that she was angry at her alleged stalker, not scared of him, sufficient evidence supported the man’s stalking conviction, the Court of Appeals of Indiana has ruled.
An Indiana man has received a life prison sentence for stalking his estranged wife to Florida, shooting her and burying her body in Tennessee, court records show.
A man convicted of multiple stalking charges has failed in his bid for post-conviction relief.
A man who waived his appellate rights as part of a plea agreement has been granted permission to appeal his 25-year executed sentence as being contrary to law.
A man seeking to be rid of a protective order brought against him by his ex-girlfriend convinced the Indiana Court of Appeals that insufficient evidence supported the order.
Indiana Supreme Court justices declined to hear oral arguments in 13 cases last week but agreed to hear two cases involving duty of care and stalking.
A man’s act of following a college student for more than two hours on U.S. Highway 30 from Valparaiso to Warsaw constituted stalking, Indiana Supreme Court justices affirmed Tuesday, finding his actions were continuous in nature.
A man who followed a woman by car from Valparaiso to Warsaw has lost an appeal of his conviction and sentence for stalking. The Indiana Court of Appeals rejected his right-to-travel jury instruction arguments as well as his challenge to the evidence against him.
Attorneys interested in receiving training on modest means and pro bono representation of domestic violence victims will have an opportunity to do so at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana next month.
It began in July 2017, when Katelin Seo was arrested on stalking-related charges and ordered to unlock her cellphone as part of the criminal investigation. Seo refused, invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and a flurry of constitutional and technology-related questions ensued.
A woman found in contempt for refusing to unlock her smartphone in a criminal investigation has informed the Indiana Supreme Court that her criminal cases have been resolved. Now, the high court wants to hear arguments over whether her ongoing appeal is moot.
A Kokomo police officer lost her protective order against a man she alleged was stalking her after the Indiana Court of Appeals found there was insufficient evidence to support the claims.
Expungement petitioners do not have the right to cross-examine the victims of their crimes who submit victim impact statements, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in a Tuesday decision upholding the denial of a Marion County expungement petition.
The Indiana Supreme Court will hit the road early next year to hear oral argument in a first impression case involving smartphone privacy. Justices also have invited amicus parties in the case as they seek to determine whether law enforcement can force a woman to unlock her phone as part of a criminal investigation.
The Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence’s Satellite Attorney Program offers free civil legal services to low-income victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and stalking. The program has a network of just over 100 attorneys across Indiana and, since January 2016, has provided legal advice or counsel, including direct representation, in roughly 350 cases.
A consequential Indiana Court of Appeals ruling on an issue of first impression last month marked one of the first times state courts have been asked to reconcile civil rights with advancing technology. The question: considering the personal nature of the contents of a person’s smartphone, can an individual be forced to unlock a smartphone without violating the Fifth Amendment?