• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Categories
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Juvenile
  • Courts
    • Supreme
    • Appeals
    • Tax
    • SCOTUS
    • 7th Circuit
  • Judges

Case Clips

Published by the Indiana Office of Court Services

Criminal

Tiplick v. State, No. 49S04-1505-CR-287, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., Oct. 7, 2015).

October 9, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

Synthetic-drug (aka “spice”) and “look-alike drug” statutes are not unconstitutional for vagueness or delegating legislative authority to administrative agency. But synthetic-drug charging informations were insufficient, requiring dismissal without prejudice, for failing to reference the emergency administrative rule criminalizing the “XLR11” drug on which the charges were based.

Quinn v. State, No. 20A03-1503-CR-82, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 8, 2015).

October 9, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, B. Barteau

Charges for 1988 child molestation and criminal confinement were not barred by statute of limitations; State’s discovery in 2012 of DNA evidence implicating defendant was reasonably diligent, and charges were filed within one year of that discovery.

Henderson v. State, No. 34A02-1501-CR-33, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2015).

October 5, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

There is no statutory, constitutional, or common law restriction on court’s discretion to impose consecutive sentences for misdemeanor offenses. However, court must conduct indigency hearing before imposing a fine.

Hale v. State, No. 35A02-1501-CR-57, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2015).

October 5, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey, P. Mathias

Denial of motion to depose codefendants, though error, was not properly preserved for appeal; when codefendants testified at trial, defendant did not seek to exclude their testimony, renew his request to depose them, or seek a continuance.

Larkin v. State, No. 46A05-1411-CR-550, ___ N.E.3d ___, (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 30, 2015).

October 5, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

Defendant’s appeal seeking to disqualify entire county prosecutor’s office and appoint special prosecutor was dismissed as moot; newly-elected Prosecutor had not been involved with the challenged conduct, and defendant could separately pursue disqualification of particular Deputy Prosecutors who were involved.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 167
  • Page 168
  • Page 169
  • Page 170
  • Page 171
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 329
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

About

Case Clips is a weekly publication of the Indiana Office of Court Services featuring appellate opinions curated by IOCS staff for Indiana judges.

Subscribe
  • Flickr
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Archive

Copyright © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs