• 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

Thomas v. State, No. 49A02-1002-CR-105, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 8, 2010)

November 12, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, E. Brown

Vacates invasion of privacy conviction for protection order subject’s “stop calling me, fagot [sic]” remark to protected person during a court hearing, on basis direct contempt was “more appropriate” remedy.

Parish v. State, No. 02A03-1002-CR-74, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 9, 2010)

November 12, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias, P. Riley

When officer knew motorist stopped for a traffic violation and handcuffed outside the vehicle for safety was a suspect in shootings, her protective search of passenger compartment permissibly included unlocking the glove box to check it for weapons.

Arlton v. Schraut, No. 79A02-0906-CV-541, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 9, 2010)

November 12, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

Deliberating jury should have been provided with a computer or some other method to view CD exhibits containing high-resolution digital images of plaintiff’s pre-surgery retina; failure of court to provide a viewing method or to give tendered instruction that jury could ask to view the CD images in open court was reversible error.

Blanford v. Blanford, No. 65A01-1004-DR-181, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 10, 2010)

November 12, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

Use of separate child support worksheets, one for each child, to adjust for the different number of overnights each child would have with the noncustodial parent, erroneously inflated the parent’s support obligation under the Guidelines.

Oberst v. State, No. 14A05-1003-PC-157, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 3, 2010)

November 5, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Because the Sixth Amendment counsel right does not apply to a pre-charge police interview, defendant could not assert a claim that counsel gave him ineffective assistance during the interview.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 510
  • Go to page 511
  • Go to page 512
  • Go to page 513
  • Go to page 514
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 589
  • 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