• 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

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.

Clark v. Mattar, No. 19A-CT-380, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 4, 2019).

October 7, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford

Trial court abused its discretion in denying for-cause challenge to juror who indicated that he would be unable to sit on a jury asked to determine damages for non-economic loss, which plaintiff was seeking.

Pinch-N-Post, LLC v. McIntosh, No. 19A-TP-239, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 27, 2019).

September 3, 2019 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, E. Tavitas

The proper remedy for an inadequate tax sale redemption notice [Ind. Code § 6-1.1-25-4.5] is ordering a new 120-day redemption period.

Smith v. State, No. 18A-CR-3009, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 7, 2019).

August 12, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, E. Tavitas

The State failed to establish police officer’s decision to impound defendant’s vehicle adhered to established departmental routine or regulation. While evidence of the department’s written procedure need not be introduced, more than conclusory testimony from an officer is required.

Cleveland v. State, No. 18A-CR-2298, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 15, 2019).

July 15, 2019 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, J. Baker

Trial court could not order the destruction of defendant’s handgun for the mere possession of it, but it also could not order its return when he lacked a license to carry.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 28
  • 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