• 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

Flowers v. State, No. 24A-CR-1219, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2025).

February 3, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

The abuse of discretion standard of review applies to the review of trial court bond forfeiture rulings.

Graff v. State, No. 23A-CR-2546, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2025).

February 3, 2025 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Where a suspect has not been arrested, arraigned or indicted, a polygraph examination and post-testing interrogation do not constitute critical stages upon which the right to counsel attaches. Evidence that a polygraph examination directly preceded a confession, occurred in the exact same room, and involved the same officer to which the confession was given may be admissible. Consistent with Indiana Rule of Evidence 106, the preliminaries to a polygraph examination, the examination itself, and the subsequent police interview are all part of one recorded statement, and fairness dictates that neither party should be able to decide that the jury will hear only the parts of the statement it deems favorable to its case.

Cohen v. State, No. 24A-CR-710, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 23, 2024).

December 30, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Brown

Once a defendant demonstrates that they have testified pursuant to a grant of immunity to matters related to the prosecution before a grand jury, the State has the burden of showing an independent, legitimate source for the disputed evidence if the defendant/witness is the target of the same grand jury.

Bradley v. State, No. 24S-CR-206, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., Dec. 18, 2024).

December 20, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

A trial court’s sua sponte order for a competency evaluation does not extinguish and reset time under Criminal Rule 4(B); so long as the defendant maintains a position reasonably consistent with his speedy-trial request, delays attributable to competency evaluations simply toll the applicable deadline.

Helvie v. State, No. 24A-CR-1441, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 16, 2024).

December 16, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Indiana Criminal Rule 3.3(C)(1) provides, in part, that a “defendant may plead guilty to all charged offenses without a plea agreement or to at least one of the charged offenses pursuant to a plea agreement negotiated with the state.” Therefore, absent a plea agreement, the Rule’s language precludes a defendant from pleading guilty to anything less than all of the charges.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 323
  • 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