• 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

Clanton v. State, No. 49A02-1203-CR-198, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 15, 2012).

November 15, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, J. Baker

Police officer in full uniform working as a private security guard was acting as a law enforcement officer under the circumstances of the case; officer making a Terry frisk could remove sharp object from defendant’s pocket, but when officer realized object was a pen cap and not a weapon he could not take the plastic bag he observed in the cap out and inspect its contents, even though he testified bags in such caps were often used, in his experience, to store narcotics.

State v. Holtsclaw, 49S02-1205-CR-26, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Nov. 5, 2012).

November 9, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

30-day deadline in Appellate Rule 9 for filing a notice of appeal when a party files a motion to correct error applies to the state in a criminal case.

Bailey v. State, 49S02-1204-CR-234, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Nov. 5, 2012).

November 9, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

Any offense that causes the victim physical pain meets the test “bodily injury” requirement for domestic battery.

Burton v. State, No. 45A03-1201-CR-6, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 8, 2012).

November 9, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Sharpnack

Indiana ex post facto law prohibits application of the sex offender registration laws to a resident convicted of a sex offense in another state before the enactment of both that state’s and Indiana’s registration acts.

Kane v. State, No. 30S04-1206-CR-372, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind., Oct. 30, 2012).

November 2, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

Jury instruction regarding accomplice liability, without mention of intent, was an incorrect statement of law, and the error was not harmless.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 236
  • Go to page 237
  • Go to page 238
  • Go to page 239
  • Go to page 240
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 325
  • 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