• 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

Weekly v. State, No. 20A03-1712-CR-2922, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 29, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

A habitual vehicular substance offender (HVSO) finding does not constitute a separate crime nor result in a separate sentence, but is an enhancement to an underlying felony conviction.

State v. Larkin, No. 46S04-1711-CR-701, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 27, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Delays resulting from defendant’s interlocutory appeal and motion for change of judge are attributable to him when calculating Criminal Rule 4(C) time period.
When there is prosecutorial misconduct, the remedy characteristically imposed is not to dismiss the charges but to suppress the evidence.

Paquette v. State, No. 63S04-1709-CR-570, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 29, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

The resisting law enforcement statute, Ind. Code 35-44.1-3-1, permits only one conviction for each act of resisting, even where multiple deaths are caused by use of a vehicle.

Edmonds v. State, No. 18S-CR-50, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 20, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

In a companion case to Paquette v. State, the resisting law enforcement statute, Ind. Code section 35-44.1-3-1, authorizes only one conviction for each act of resisting, even when it resulted in the death of one person and serious bodily injury to two others.

McCallister v. McCallister, No. 49D12-1606-DR-19232, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 26, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Friedlander

Although under federal law the court could not order husband to change the beneficiary on his Air Force Survivor Benefit Plan as required by the Marital Settlement Agreement, the trial court can determine the value of the Survivor Benefit Plan and reconsider the distribution of marital assets as an alternative remedy.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 207
  • Page 208
  • Page 209
  • Page 210
  • Page 211
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 602
  • 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