• 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

J. Kirsch

McCloud v. State, No. 49A05-1102-CR-77, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2011).

December 21, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

Neither the Interstate Agreement on Detainers nor the writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum procedures applied to defendant while he was in federal custody for ten months; Criminal Rule 4 consequently was applicable, and the time the defendant was in federal custody was attributable to the defendant under the Criminal Rule 4(C) one-year rule.

Kitchen v. Kitchen, et al, No. 27A04-1101-DR-1, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 29, 2011)

September 1, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

Only parents, grandparents and step-parents have standing to pursue visitation with a child.

Bex v. State, No. 53A01-1008-CR-422, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 22, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

Federal Constitution permits trial by a jury of five when a jury of six is provided for by law, without alternates by agreement, and, due to an emergency, a juror is excused; consent to trial by five under such circumstances may be given by counsel, as a matter of trial strategy.

Gilmore v. State, No. 40A01-1011-CR-553, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 24, 2011).

August 26, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

After defendant had initially been found indigent and a reassessment of indigence elicited no evidence of a change in financial status, the trial court’s statement that an evaluation of defendant’s behavior (which had been obstreperous) was also relevant to indigence prompted an appellate finding the trial judge abused his discretion in finding the defendant to no longer be indigent; trial court’s finding that the defendant had forfeited his right to appointed counsel by his conduct was reversed on the basis that, without a hearing warning defendant that his conduct could result in loss of appointed counsel, the defendant could not be said to have made a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel by his conduct.

C.S. v. State, No. 67A01-1101-JS-19, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 17, 2011).

August 19, 2011 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, J. Kirsch

Evidence that child skipped one day of school, missed part of five classes, was tardy twelve times and that his mother had cooperated with school and disciplined him did not suffice to raise the required status delinquency inference he was not receiving care, treatment, or rehabilitation.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Go to page 10
  • Go to page 11
  • Go to page 12
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 15
  • 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