• 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

Horton v. State, No. 79S02-1510-CR-628, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., April 21, 2016).

April 25, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

Defendant’s personal waiver of second-phase jury trial was required; counsel could not waive it on defendant’s behalf, even though defendant had just been through first phase of bifurcated trial.
Trial court did not abuse its discretion in taking judicial notice of prior case file as evidence of defendant’s prior conviction, because file was readily and publicly available and cause number was repeatedly an unambiguously identified on the record; however, better practice would have been to formally enter the relevant documents into the record.

Tinker v. State, No. 10A01-1507-CR-999, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 22, 2016).

April 25, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: E. Najam

Speedy-trial objection was not untimely; defendant had an obligation to object only if, during the 365-day period under Crim. R. 4(C), the court scheduled a new trial outside that period.

Citizens Action Coalition of Ind. v. Koch, No. 49S00-1510-PL-00607, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 19, 2016).

April 25, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: R. Rucker, S. David, Supreme

Whether the work product exception within the Indiana Access to Public Records Act applies to the Indiana General Assembly is a non-justiciable question.

Gaff v. Indiana-Purdue University of Fort Wayne, No. 02S03-1604-PL-201, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., April 22, 2016).

April 25, 2016 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: B. Dickson, Supreme

“[W]hile the plaintiff’s cause of action arises under federal law, summary judgment proceedings arising under Indiana Trial Rule 56 are governed by Indiana summary judgment procedure and jurisprudence.”

Gibson v. State, No. 22S00-1206-DP-360, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., April 12, 2016).

April 18, 2016 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

Allowing State to amend death-penalty charging information shortly before trial—changing the aggravator from having “committed” another murder to having “been convicted of” another murder—was not error.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 286
  • Go to page 287
  • Go to page 288
  • Go to page 289
  • Go to page 290
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 596
  • 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