• 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

Appeals

Dilley v. State, No. 19A-CR-173, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 23, 2019).

October 28, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

A trial court errs when it grants the State’s motion for continuance, based the unavailability of laboratory testing results, under Criminal Rule 4(D), where the State fails to establish diligence.

Byers v. State, No. 19A-CR-246, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 24, 2019

October 28, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

A four-day period between the illegal activity and the finding of probable cause does not render a warrant constitutionally stale.

Ind. Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Douglass, No. 19A-MI-216, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 23, 2019).

October 28, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

BMV had the right to pursue a suspension of defendant’s driving privileges in Indiana even though he was a no longer a resident of Indiana.

McAnalley v. State, No. 18A-CR-1099, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 18, 2019).

October 21, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, C. Darden

Defendant is permitted to stipulate to his status as a felon in a trial for unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon. When a passenger in an automobile is arrested on a warrant, search of the passenger compartment is permissible under both the Indiana and federal constitutions, based on suspicious behavior and/or admission by the passenger of ownership of contraband in the passenger side of the vehicle.

Weikart v. Whitko Comm. School Corp., No. 19A-CT-1224, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 17, 2019).

October 21, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Baker, T. Crone

Trial court properly dismissed case for failure to state a claim; police officer did not have a special duty to plaintiff to protect her activities from public disclosure.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 100
  • Go to page 101
  • Go to page 102
  • Go to page 103
  • Go to page 104
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 404
  • 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