Indiana Code § 1-1-2-4 is an interpretive “reference statute” that must be read together with the predicate offense statute, and that when the predicate statute uses only a general reference like “a felony,” the State need only allege a prior felony conviction (including an out-of-state felony) without proving the foreign offense is “substantially similar” to an Indiana felony.
L. Rush
Ramos-Osario v. State, No. 26S-CR-198, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jun. 24, 2026).
While judges can reconsider pretrial suppression rulings, the State is not required to prove constitutional compliance a second time at trial.
Gary v. State, No. 25S-CR-265, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Apr. 9, 2026).
Under the statute prohibiting incarcerated individuals from possessing material capable of causing bodily injury (IC 35-44.1-3-7), even if an arrestee involuntarily brings prohibited material into a penal facility, the failure to relinquish it at the earliest reasonable opportunity is a voluntary act that may subject them to criminal liability.
Moyers v. State, No. 26S-CR-86, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 20, 2026).
The Powell test applies to multiple convictions for elevated offenses that share a common base offense. Stated another way, a base offense and its elevated forms constitute a single statutory offense.
Indiana Compensation Rating Bureau and Indiana Department of Insurance v. Technology Insurance Company, No. 26S-PL-83, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Mar. 17, 2026).
Whether the Company is entitled to relief rests on two questions: first, whether the Company had to follow the dispute-resolution provisions set out in the Assigned Risk Plan and agreements, limiting the Company’s relief in the trial court to judicial review under the Administrative Orders and Procedures Act; second, assuming the Company is limited to seeking recourse under AOPA, whether the Company properly sought judicial review.