• 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

Lehman v. State, No. 35A05-0909-CR-513, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 13, 2010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Riley

Confidential informant’s taped statements as to what occurred in controlled buy were hearsay and were inadmissible as well under the Crawford Confrontation Clause rule; informant’s statements during the buy were not admitted for the truth of their content and hence were not hearsay.

Shepherd v. State, No. 70A01-0908-PC-388, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 14, 2010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Defense counsel’s representation of key prosecution witness on unrelated pending charges created a prima facie case of actual conflict and resulted in counsel’s failure to cross-examine the witness on the charges, resulting in ineffective assistance.

Barnes v. State, No. 82A05-0910-CR-592, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 15, 2010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

Evidence required court to have instructed on defendant’s right to reasonably resist officer’s unlawful entry into defendant’s home.

Blakemore v. State, No. 49A02-0907-CR-614, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 16, 2010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, M. May

Plea agreement to comply with “the statutory requirements of registering . . . as a sex offender,” when there were no such requirements at the time of conviction, could not justify ex post facto application during probation of subsequently-enacted registration obligation.

Smith v. Wrigley, No. 33A04-0912-CV-727, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 14, 2010)

April 20, 2010 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Statutory requirement that inmate pay civil filing fees due to prior frivolous civil case dismissals does not violate Indiana Constitution Open Courts Clause.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 364
  • Go to page 365
  • Go to page 366
  • Go to page 367
  • Go to page 368
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 400
  • 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