• 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. Roberts

Riley v. California, Nos. 13–132 and 13–212, __ U.S. __ (June 25, 2014).

June 26, 2014 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: J. Roberts, SCOTUS

“Our answer to the question of what police must do before searching a cell phone seized incident to an arrest is accordingly simple— get a warrant.”

Alleyne v. United States, No. 11-9335, __ U.S. __ (June 17, 2013).

June 21, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Thomas, J. Roberts, S. Breyer, S. Sotomayor, SCOTUS

“[A]ny fact that increases the mandatory minimum [sentence] is an ‘element’ that must be submitted to the jury.”

Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11–1425, __U.S. __ (April 17, 2013).

April 19, 2013 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: A. Kennedy, C. Thomas, J. Roberts, S. Sotomayor, SCOTUS

Rejects argument that “the natural metabolization of alcohol in the bloodstream presents a per se exigency that justifies an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement for nonconsensual blood testing in all drunk-driving cases,” and holds instead “that exigency in this context must be determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances.”

Blueford v. Arkansas, No. 10–1320, 566 U.S. ____ (May 24, 2012).

May 25, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: J. Roberts, S. Sotomayor, SCOTUS

The jury foreperson’s report that the jury was unanimous regarding the charges of capital murder and first-degree murder in his favor was not a final resolution when the trial ended in a mistrial, and so the Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrying defendant on those charges.

Smith v. Cain, No. 10–8145, 565 U.S. __ (Jan. 20, 2012).

January 13, 2012 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: J. Roberts, SCOTUS

State’s failure to disclose to defense the sole eyewitness’s pre-trial statement to detective that he could not identify any of the gunmen, when eyewitness identified defendant at trial as the first gunman, violated the due process prosecution disclosure rule of Brady v. Maryland.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • 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