• 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

N. Vaidik

T.D. v. State, No. 22A-CR-00364, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 31, 2022).

October 31, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, M. Bailey, N. Vaidik

A delinquency adjudication is void and should be set aside when the trial court accepts an admission without inquiring whether juvenile knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived hi/hers statutory and constitutional rights as required by the juvenile waiver statute, Ind. Code § 31-32-5-1.

In re Z.D., No. 22A-JC-875, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sept. 28, 2022).

October 3, 2022 Filed Under: Civil, Juvenile Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

When a party’s first appearance in a case is made in person when it should have been virtual, the court should be hesitant to treat that appearance as defiant or otherwise improper. A parent who requests a contested CHINS fact-finding hearing has a constitutional right to that hearing, and a parent does not forfeit that right by appearing in person to a virtual hearing.

Theobald v. State, No. 21A-CR-2746, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 30, 2022).

July 5, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

The “new-crime exception” to the Miranda exclusionary rule applies when a statement is made by a person who is subject to custodial interrogation but not given Miranda warnings. Under such circumstances, the statement is still admissible if the statement itself is evidence of a new crime.

White v. Szalasny, No. 21A-CC-2063, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., June 20, 2022).

June 20, 2022 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Indiana Security Deposit Statute does not limit a fee award to certain stages of the proceeding; a judge has discretion to award of fees relating to the fee petition.

Reyes v. State, No. 21A-CR-2646, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., May 6, 2022).

May 9, 2022 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, N. Vaidik

Because Indiana Jury Rule 26(a) affords trial courts the option to give final instructions before or after closing arguments, a court can do either without abusing its discretion.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 4
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 46
  • 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