• 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

Supreme

R.R. v. State, No. 18S-JV-230, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 13, 2018).

September 17, 2018 Filed Under: Juvenile Tagged With: G. Slaughter, L. Rush, M. Massa, S. David, Supreme

A juvenile has a right to be present at a fact-finding hearing under Ind. Code 31-32-5-1, unless waived by counsel; waived by parent, guardian, custodian, or guardian ad litem; or waived by the child.

Cox v. Evansville Police Dept., No. 18S-CT-447, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 13, 2018).

September 17, 2018 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: L. Rush, Supreme

Cities may be liable under the respondeat superior scope-of-employment rule for sexual assaults by on-duty police officers, but the common-carrier exception does not apply.

Boggs v. State, No. 18S-CR-430, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 23, 2018).

August 27, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Per Curiam, Supreme

Proof of the “slightest penetration” of the female sex organ, including penetration of the external genitalia, is sufficient to sustain a conviction for child molestation based on sexual intercourse.

Jackson v. State, No. 18S-CR-00113, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Aug. 24, 2018).

August 27, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: C. Goff, Supreme

Based on the general inquiry from the Coble decision on the habitual offender enhancement statute and the unambiguous language of the criminal gang enhancement statute, a trial court on remand from a reversal of a criminal gang enhancement must resentence the defendant on all the felonies underlying that enhancement.

State v. Larkin, No. 46S04-1711-CR-701, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 27, 2018).

July 2, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: S. David, Supreme

Delays resulting from defendant’s interlocutory appeal and motion for change of judge are attributable to him when calculating Criminal Rule 4(C) time period.
When there is prosecutorial misconduct, the remedy characteristically imposed is not to dismiss the charges but to suppress the evidence.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 57
  • Go to page 58
  • Go to page 59
  • Go to page 60
  • Go to page 61
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 173
  • 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