• 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

C. Bradford

Mishra v. State, 20A-XP-1726, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Mar. 9, 2021).

March 15, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

A court is not authorized to consider an expunged conviction in the context of an expungement proceeding for purposes of determining whether the person has a conviction within the previous five years.

Sullivan Corp. v. Rabco Enterprises, LLC, No. 20A-PL-1444, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 7, 2020).

December 7, 2020 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Ind. Code § 32-28-3-17, on forum selection clauses, should be read broadly to apply to all contracts for the improvement of real estate in Indiana.

Harris v. State, No. 20A-CR-732, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Nov. 17, 2020).

November 23, 2020 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Trial court acted within its discretion when it accepted a guilty plea but explained it would not be accepted until review of the PSI; then after review of the PSI determined the plea agreement was unacceptable and allowed the defendant to revoke the guilty plea before trial.

Edwards v. State, No. 20A-CR-42, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 30, 2020).

May 4, 2020 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

When there is no nexus between the illegal possession and another crime, courts must look to the time of acquisition to determine whether multiple possessions constitute a single episode of criminal conduct.

Butler v. State, No. 19A-MI-5, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 27, 2019).

December 30, 2019 Filed Under: Civil, Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

The trial court properly ordered the forfeiture of defendant’s car because the 2018 amendments to Indiana’s civil-forfeiture scheme were procedural in nature and do not constitute an ex post facto law; defendant failed to establish that the seizure of the car was in any way improper.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 27
  • 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