• 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

Becker v. State, No. 45S03-1301-CR-9, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Aug. 22, 2013).

August 29, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

Under a supreme court 2011 decision, Indiana ex post facto law would have allowed lifetime sex offender registration to apply to Becker, but a 2008 trial court ruling to the contrary was res judicata against the State on the issue, as the local prosecutor’s representation in the 2008 litigation was in privity with the DOC’s intervention in 2011 seeking to impose lifetime registration status based on the 2011 opinion.

Morris v. State, No. 14A05-1209-CR-495, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 23, 2013).

August 29, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker, M. Barnes

A trial court may order restitution in a case in which there is a plea bargain silent on the restitution issue as long as the bargain is “open” and leaves sentencing entirely to the court’s discretion.

Garrett v. State, No. 49S04-1207-PC-431, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Aug. 28, 2013).

August 29, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, R. Rucker, Supreme

“[T]he ‘actual evidence’ test . . . is applicable to cases in which there has been an acquittal on one charge and retrial on another charge after a hung jury.”

Oney v. State, No. 49S05-1212-CR-668, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind., Aug. 28, 2013).

August 29, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: R. Rucker, Supreme

“Although a defendant who pleads guilty to driving while suspended as a habitual traffic violator may not later challenge the plea contending that an underlying offense has been set aside on grounds of procedural error, a defendant may be entitled to relief where an underlying offense has been set aside on grounds of material error.”

Johnson v. State, No. 49A02-1301-CR-28, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 20, 2013).

August 22, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Barnes

Rejects arguments that traffic stop, based on officer’s belief vehicle was in violation of the Window Tint Statute, was illegal under the Indiana Constitution or violated an implicit prohibition in the Statute itself of “unbridled discretion” for police to pull over vehicles with window tint.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 224
  • Page 225
  • Page 226
  • Page 227
  • Page 228
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 330
  • 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