• 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

Randolph v. Buss, No. 33A04-1010-MI-684, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2011).

July 29, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Legislature intended that inmate’s left-over educational credit time after his release on parole would not still be available to him when his parole was revoked and he returned to prison.

Lock v. State, No. 35A04-1010-CR-641, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 26, 2011).

July 29, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker, M. May

Evidence defendant’s motorcycle was going 43 miles per hour did not prove its “maximum design speed” was 25 miles per hour or more, a “design speed” the State had to prove in order to show defendant was operating a “motor vehicle” rather than a “motorized bicycle” so that defendant was guilty of driving while suspended.

Hawkins v. State, No. 79A02-1101-CR-100, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 18, 2011).

July 22, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb, T. Crone

Sentence modification statute’s 365 day period in which judge may modify without prosecutor agreement starts when original sentence is imposed and is not “reset” with a resentencing.

Cottingham v. State, No. 06A01-1008-CR-431, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 19, 2011).

July 22, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

2010 amendment of I.C. 35-38-2.6-6 providing for “credit time” for community corrections home detention is ameliorative and required credit for home detention served prior to the amendment when probation was revoked after effective date.

Sharp . State, No. 12A02-1010-CR-1188, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 19, 2011).

July 22, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Defendant’s convictions for Class A child molesting and Class C child molesting, alleged to have occurred during the same 13 month period, did not violate Indiana double jeopardy under the “actual evidence test.”

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 263
  • Go to page 264
  • Go to page 265
  • Go to page 266
  • Go to page 267
  • 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