• 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

Bex v. State, No. 53A01-1008-CR-422, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

Federal Constitution permits trial by a jury of five when a jury of six is provided for by law, without alternates by agreement, and, due to an emergency, a juror is excused; consent to trial by five under such circumstances may be given by counsel, as a matter of trial strategy.

Perry v. State, No. 49A05-1012-CR-774, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Admission of hospital nurse’s record of statements assault victim made to nurse, including identity of attacker, did not violate either the hearsay rule or the Crawford Confrontation Clause rule.

Villagrana v. State, No. 08A05-1101-CR-21, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

“Indiana does not criminally penalize those who negligently neglect a dependent.”

Aguirre v. State, No. 49A05-1101-CR-36, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 25, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Evidence that traffic stop motorist reached her hand into her purse to answer her cellphone while officer was trying to handcuff her for safety reasons did not suffice to prove crime of resisting arrest.

Gilmore v. State, No. 40A01-1011-CR-553, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

After defendant had initially been found indigent and a reassessment of indigence elicited no evidence of a change in financial status, the trial court’s statement that an evaluation of defendant’s behavior (which had been obstreperous) was also relevant to indigence prompted an appellate finding the trial judge abused his discretion in finding the defendant to no longer be indigent; trial court’s finding that the defendant had forfeited his right to appointed counsel by his conduct was reversed on the basis that, without a hearing warning defendant that his conduct could result in loss of appointed counsel, the defendant could not be said to have made a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel by his conduct.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 262
  • Go to page 263
  • Go to page 264
  • Go to page 265
  • Go to page 266
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 324
  • 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 © 2025 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs