• 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

Juvenile

L.W. v. State, No. 22A-JV-1138, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 23, 2022).

November 29, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

Ind. Code § 31-32-5-1 mandates that before consent may be established for purposes of a blood draw, a juvenile must be advised, and provided the opportunity, to have meaningful consultation with their parent/guardian.

T.D. v. State, No. 22A-CR-00364, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 31, 2022).

October 31, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey, N. Vaidik

A delinquency adjudication is void and should be set aside when the trial court accepts an admission without inquiring whether juvenile knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived hi/hers statutory and constitutional rights as required by the juvenile waiver statute, Ind. Code § 31-32-5-1.

In re A.C., No. 22A-JC-49, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 21, 2022).

October 24, 2022 Filed Under: Civil, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Transgender child’s continued removal is not contrary to the CHINS-6 statute and does not violate the parents’ constitutional rights to the care, custody, and control of child or to their rights to the free exercise of religion. Parents have the right to exercise their religious beliefs, but they do not have the right to exercise them in a manner that causes physical or emotional harm to child. Trial court’s temporary restriction on the discussion of child’s transgender identity outside of family therapy does not violate the parents’ free speech rights.

A.R. v. State, No. 22A-JV-156, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 5, 2022).

October 11, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas, P. Riley

While Ind. Code § 31-30-2-3, states that the trial court, on its own motion, may reinstate a jurisdiction over a juvenile after release from DOC, a motion by the prosecution is sufficient. Moreover, Ind. Code § 11-8-8-4.5, which subjects an offender who is at least 14 years age to sex offender registration, applies at the time of registration, not when the delinquent act was committed.

In re Z.D., No. 22A-JC-875, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 28, 2022).

October 3, 2022 Filed Under: Civil, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

When a party’s first appearance in a case is made in person when it should have been virtual, the court should be hesitant to treat that appearance as defiant or otherwise improper. A parent who requests a contested CHINS fact-finding hearing has a constitutional right to that hearing, and a parent does not forfeit that right by appearing in person to a virtual hearing.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 25
  • 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