• 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

Abbott v. State, 19A-PL-1635, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 15, 2021).

February 15, 2021 Filed Under: Civil, Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey, N. Vaidik

In a civil forfeiture action, the res may be used for defense related expenses.

DeWees v. State, 20A-CR-1146, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 15, 2021).

February 15, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

Indiana Criminal Rule 26 warrants that, where a qualifying arrestee does not present a substantial risk of flight or danger to self or others, a trial court should release the arrestee without money bail or surety subject to such restrictions and conditions as determined by the court. Moreover, our Indiana Code provides that, in setting the amount of bail or deciding whether to grant conditional pre-trial release, trial courts must consider all facts relevant to the risk of a defendant’s failure to appear, including factors enumerated in Indiana Code Section 35-33-8-4(b).

Fields v. State, 20A-CR-1799, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 26, 2021).

February 1, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, E. Najam

Notwithstanding a waiver of appeal provision in a plea agreement, a defendant who was sentenced contrary to law is an eligible defendant permitted to seek a belated appeal pursuant to Post-Conviction Rule 2.

B.R. v. State, 20A-JV-1203, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 28, 2021).

February 1, 2021 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, E. Tavitas

To prove constructive possession, the State must demonstrate that the person has (1) the capability to maintain dominion and control over the item; and (2) the intent to maintain dominion and control over it.

Smith v. State, 20A-CR-1014, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 20, 2021).

January 25, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, R. Altice

In a trial in absentia, it is not error for the trial court to inform the jury that defendant was personally notified of the trial date.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 68
  • Go to page 69
  • Go to page 70
  • Go to page 71
  • Go to page 72
  • 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