• 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

P. Mathias

Niccum v. State, No. 21A-CR-1533, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 20, 2021).

December 20, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

The calculation of good time credit is a function of the defendant’s accrued time.

Washington v. State, No. 21A-CR-997, _ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 9, 2021).

December 13, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

The market reports exception to hearsay under Evidence Rule 803(17) does not apply to allow the admission of evidence from Drugs.com that was used to identify pills for possession charges.

Stott v. State, 20A-CR-1924, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Aug. 13, 2021).

August 16, 2021 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

To establish admissibility based on the present sense impression exception to the hearsay rule, witnesses’ statements to police officers in a recording must demonstrate, among other things, contemporaneity between the events perceived and the declarations about those events. Moreover, it is the proponent’s burden to establish the strong showing of authenticity and competency for the admissibility of photographs used as substantive evidence under the silent-witness theory.

Lake Co. Bd. Of Commissioners v. State, No. 20A-MI-1527, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., April 30, 2021).

May 3, 2021 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

County is responsible for paying the costs of its probation officers’ legal defense that are incurred in the performance of the officers’ duties.

Bunnell v. State, 20A-CR-981, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Dec. 18, 2020).

December 21, 2020 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, P. Mathias

When probable cause for a search warrant is premised solely on law enforcement’s detection of the odor of raw marijuana, the assertion must be based on more than personal belief: the affiant–officer must provide some information about the detecting officers’ relevant “training” or “experience” that led to the ultimate conclusion.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 5
  • Go to page 6
  • Go to page 7
  • Go to page 8
  • Go to page 9
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 29
  • 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 © 2026 · Indiana Office of Court Services · courts.in.gov/iocs