For purposes of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, a failure-to-appear bench warrant issued after a formal information was filed after for failure to appear at a pretrial conference is sufficient to serve as a detainer.
Indiana Dept. of Educ. v. Mt. Zion’s Loving Day Care Ministry, et. al., No. 26S-PL-134, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Oct. 26, 2026).
The Department of Education’s blanket policy of rejecting correction proposals by CACFP participants once a deficiency recurs, despite its authority to exercise such discretion under federal law, was arbitrary and capricious.
C.J.W. v. T.H., No. 26A-AD-1225, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 16, 2026).
A Level 5 criminal recklessness conviction did not bar the stepfather from adoption because the court ruled on the adoption petition after the five-year period had expired. This court found that the time period noted in the statute “refers to the date the court rules on the petition, not the filing date” of the petition.
State of Indiana ex rel. IDOT v. Harrison Circuit Ct. & Honorable Justin Mills, Special Judge, No. 26S-OR-265, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Oct. 2, 2026).
Appellate precedent holds, without exception, that an appraiser’s award is binding if no party timely files exceptions. The trial court lost its discretion to deny the State’s motion for judgment when the defendant failed to timely file exceptions to the appraisers’ report. This, combined with the ethical conundrum the State finds itself in if it is compelled to mediate a judgment amount that has already been fixed by law, is sufficient to establish extreme hardship to file a Petition for Writ of Mandamus.
Alexander v. State, No. 26A-CR-2705, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 30, 2026).
The legislature intended that contributing to delinquency as a Class A misdemeanor does not require the defendant’s knowledge of the child’s age, but the greater offense of contributing to delinquency as a Level 5 felony does require such knowledge.