• 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

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.

Paquette v. State, No. 63S04-1709-CR-570, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 29, 2018).

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

The resisting law enforcement statute, Ind. Code 35-44.1-3-1, permits only one conviction for each act of resisting, even where multiple deaths are caused by use of a vehicle.

Edmonds v. State, No. 18S-CR-50, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 20, 2018).

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

In a companion case to Paquette v. State, the resisting law enforcement statute, Ind. Code section 35-44.1-3-1, authorizes only one conviction for each act of resisting, even when it resulted in the death of one person and serious bodily injury to two others.

Durden v. State, No. 18S-CR-329, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., June 20, 2018).

June 25, 2018 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: M. Massa, Supreme

Even though trial court improperly removed a juror after deliberations had begun, defendant’s convictions were affirmed because he and his defense counsel expressly agreed to the constitutionally-defective procedure as part of a deliberate trial strategy.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 58
  • Go to page 59
  • Go to page 60
  • Go to page 61
  • Go to page 62
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 174
  • 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