• 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

Zeller v. AAA Ins. Co., No. 64A05-1502-CT-84, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 4, 2015).

August 7, 2015 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Insurer’s acceptance of insured’s payment reinstated the insurance policy.

Young v. Davis, No. 71A04-1501-CT-26, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 4, 2015).

August 7, 2015 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker

The voluntary dismissal of the governmental entities did not constitute a “judgment” for purposes of ITCA, and so plaintiffs could continue their lawsuit against the government employee individually.

Buford v. State, No. 20A05-1408-CR-392, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 24, 2015).

July 31, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Search warrant was invalid; uncorroborated anonymous tip of drug dealing at defendant’s home, plus police smelling burnt marijuana and seeing unspecified amount of marijuana “shake” on table in the home, did not establish probable cause of drug dealing.

Kowalskey v. State, No. 32A01-1503-CR-99, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., July 30, 2015).

July 31, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Defendant’s conduct did not waive his right to counsel. His oral and written requests for the trial court to compel discovery were not obstreperous, and trial court had neither adequately advised defendant of the dangers of self-representation nor made necessary findings on whether his conduct under the circumstances constituted knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel.

Sampson v. State, No. 87S01-1410-CR-684, ___ N.E.3d ___ (Ind., July 30, 2015).

July 31, 2015 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: R. Rucker, Supreme

Bar on “vouching” testimony under Evid. R. 704(b) and Hoglund v. State (Ind. 2012) also bars opinion testimony of whether a witness shows “signs or indicators” of having been “coached,” unless defendant opens the door by an express or implied claim of coaching. (Overruling Kindred v. State (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) and Archer v. State (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).)

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 333
  • Page 334
  • Page 335
  • Page 336
  • Page 337
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 605
  • 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