• 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

D. Molter

Monroe v. State, No. 26S-CR-208, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2026).

July 6, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, Supreme

Tumulty’s bar on direct appeals from guilty pleas applies to double-jeopardy challenges to convictions entered on a guilty plea, so the defendant generally must proceed via post-conviction relief rather than a direct appeal. But a defendant may obtain direct appellate review by moving to withdraw the guilty plea as to the lesser-included offense (and asking the trial court to vacate that conviction) and then appealing the denial of that motion.

PENN Entertainment, Inc. v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue, No. 24S-TA-382, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 29, 2026).

July 6, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

An apportioned tax, such as a state net income tax, that a corporation pays to one state cannot be a cost of generating taxable income for another state.

Stabosz v. Friedman, No. 26S-PL-199, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 26, 2026).

June 29, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

A timely cross-appeal from a trial court’s order belatedly granting a motion to correct error is not limited to only issues raised in a motion to correct error; it may include any issues it preserved in the trial court.

Ramos-Osario v. State, No. 26S-CR-198, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 24, 2026).

June 29, 2026 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: D. Molter, L. Rush, Supreme

While judges can reconsider pretrial suppression rulings, the State is not required to prove constitutional compliance a second time at trial.

Martinez v. Smith, et al, No. 26S-CT-112, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 8, 2026).

April 13, 2026 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, G. Slaughter, Supreme

The common-law duty under the Reece case to refrain from creating hazardous conditions encompasses not just the paved portion of the roadway but also traffic-control devices within the public right-of-way.

  • Page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 9
  • 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