• 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

State v. Laker, No. 24A04-0912-CR-736, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 29, 2010)

January 7, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Operating a farm tractor while intoxicated is an operating while intoxicated offense, but operating a farm tractor while driving privileges are suspended is not an offense.

Jewell v. State, No. 32A04-1003-CR-187, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 30, 2010)

January 7, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Defendant’s federal and state constitutional rights to counsel were not violated when police had minor, for whom defendant was charged with assisting to get a tattoo, call the defendant and elicit statements police recorded about defendant’s prior criminal sexual conduct with the minor.

Saffold v. State, No. 49A05-1003-CR-180, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 2010)

December 28, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Under both the 4th Amendment and the Indiana Constitution, officer safety permitted a second pat-down search of motorist stopped for traffic infraction after officer reasonably suspected motorist might be armed, had him exit the vehicle, and found ammunition on his person in the initial pat-down and more ammunition in the vehicle.

Dawson v. State, No. 49A02-1001-CR-155, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 2010)

December 28, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

Post-Conviction Rule 2 applies only to belated appeals of convictions or sentences and accordingly does not allow a belated appeal of a probation revocation.

Deloney v. State, No. 22A01-0906-CR-273, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 2010)

December 28, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

DNA evidence is not sufficiently relevant to be admissible when the defendant “could not be excluded from a possibly infinite number of people matching the crime-scene DNA and the DNA expert cannot offer a statistical probability whether the crime scene DNA came from the defendant.”

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 283
  • Page 284
  • Page 285
  • Page 286
  • Page 287
  • 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