• 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

Lane v. State, No. 24S-CR-150, __N.E.3d __ (Ind., May 2, 2024).

May 3, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, Supreme

Sentencing courts should consider the full range of available options, including community-based rehabilitation programs, for defendants who commit low-level offenses but pose little continuing danger to others. However, to ensure public safety, courts should consider extended jail sentences for low-level offenders with a history of violence who pose a continuing threat to others. Reviewing courts will defer to a trial court’s considered assessment that a person is too dangerous to receive anything but a lengthy executed sentence.

Morales v. Rust, No. 23S-PL-371, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., March 6, 2024).

March 11, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: C. Goff, D. Molter, M. Massa

The Affiliation Statute, the statute that contains objective criteria for determining eligibility to appear on the primary ballot of a major political party and discretion for a party to allow the candidacy regardless of compliance, is constitutional.

Teising v. State, No. 24S-CR-55, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 15, 2024).

February 19, 2024 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

The maxim that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” does not relieve the State of its burden to prove criminal intent, even when the defendant bases their claimed lack of intent on a misunderstanding of the civil law.

State ex. rel. Allen v. Carroll Cir. Ct., No. 23S‐OR‐311, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 8, 2024).

February 12, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, G. Slaughter, Supreme

The trial court lacked the authority to remove counsel without considering other, less drastic options and weighing the prejudice to the defendant.

Expert Pool Builders, LLC v. Vangundy, No. 23S‐PL‐171, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 2, 2024).

January 8, 2024 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: D. Molter, Supreme

A party’s opposition to the motion for default judgment preserved its challenge for appeal and it was not required to also file a T.R. 60(B) motion.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • 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