• 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

In re Civil Commitment of G.H., No. 23A-MH-490, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 4, 2023).

August 7, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas, M. Bailey

Trial court did not have the proof necessary to impose a special condition on an involuntary commitment to outpatient therapy when there was no reasonable relationship between the special condition and respondent’s treatment and safety or that of the general public.

Hochstetler v. State, No. 22A-CR-02154, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 31, 2023).

July 31, 2023 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

Under the intimidation statute, actual malice is based on the mindset of the defendant when the defamatory words are communicated, not their intention while contemplating the defamatory act. Inherent in actual malice is the necessity for speech to be disseminated rather than merely threatened. Moreover, criminal conduct is not protected by the church-autonomy doctrine even if carried out using communications about church doctrine or policy.

Priest v. State, No. 22A-MI-2845, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 20, 2023).

July 25, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Foley

Statements automatically generated by a machine are not hearsay. State law conditions the admissibility of breath test results on the strict compliance with rigorous Department of Toxicology unless the test is administered to the driver of a commercial vehicle cited under Ind. Code § 9-24-6.1-6. While demonstrating compliance with the Code may not be strictly necessary, it is sufficient to demonstrate that the breath test administered was reliable.

H&S Financial, Inc. v. Parnell, No. 23A-SC-154, __N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 20, 2023).

July 25, 2023 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey

The holder of an equitable lien may not conduct proceedings supplemental unless it has proved that it is “a plaintiff owning the described judgment against the defendant,” T.R. 69(E), to conduct proceedings.

Hinton v. State, No. 23A-CR-107, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 21, 2023).

July 25, 2023 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

The plain-view exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement allows an officer to seize an object without a warrant if (1) the officer is lawfully in a position from which to view the object, (2) the incriminating character of the object is immediately apparent, and (3) the officer has a lawful right of access to the object.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 28
  • Go to page 29
  • Go to page 30
  • Go to page 31
  • Go to page 32
  • 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