Indiana Code section 4-6-3-3 authorizes our attorney general to issue an “investigative demand”—commonly referred to as a “civil investigative demand,” or “CID.” However, there must be an investigation otherwise the CID is unenforceable.
N. Vaidik
Masterson v. State, No. 25A-CR-2176, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 16, 2026).
A probationer’s lack of fault does not bear on whether a violation occurred but only on the sanction imposed.
In re Petition to Docket Trust of B. Alice McCoy, et al v. McCoy, No. 25A-TR-367, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 8, 2026)
Under Indiana Evidence Rule 806, when a hearsay statement, such as the attorney’s deposition, has been admitted into evidence, the hearsay declarant’s credibility may be attacked as though they had testified in person.
Neace v. State, No. 25A-CR-1615, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 21, 2026).
Asking prospective jurors if they would automatically believe a child does not leave them with a false or misleading impression of the facts or warrant an explanation or rebuttal from the State.
Mapes v. Carroll Cnty., No. 25A-CC-660, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 18, 2025).
Litigant’s persistent abuse of the judicial process and disregard for prior warnings warrant filing restrictions at the trial-court level.