• 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

Laboa v. State, No. 18A-CR-951, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 15, 2019).

August 19, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Robb

When a meritorious PCR petition was filed by a pro se petitioner, and neither party moved for summary disposition, the post-conviction court should have either ordered the cause to be submitted by affidavit or held an evidentiary hearing.

Smith v. State, No. 18A-CR-3009, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2019).

August 12, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, E. Tavitas

The State failed to establish police officer’s decision to impound defendant’s vehicle adhered to established departmental routine or regulation. While evidence of the department’s written procedure need not be introduced, more than conclusory testimony from an officer is required.

Rodriguez v. State, No. 18S-CR-143, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug, 7, 2019).

August 12, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Courts may modify a sentence only if the new sentence would not have violated the terms of the valid plea agreement had the new sentence been originally imposed

State v. Stafford, No. 39S04-1712-CR-749, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 7, 2019).

August 12, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Companion case to Rodriguez v. State reaffirming that trial courts are bound by the terms of a plea agreement and may only modify a sentence in a way that would have been authorized at the time of sentencing.

Cardosi v. State, No. 18S-LW-181, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., August 7, 2019).

August 12, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

Defendant’s conviction of murder and sentence to life in prison without parole upheld, finding that the evidence was sufficient, jurors were properly admonished, co-conspirator’s text messages were properly admitted, reading a withdrawn accomplice liability instruction was not improper, and court properly considered a non-statutory aggravator when imposing sentence.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 74
  • Go to page 75
  • Go to page 76
  • Go to page 77
  • Go to page 78
  • 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