• 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

T. Crone

Berry v. State, No. 49A04-1008-CR-536, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 20, 2011).

July 22, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Reverses bench trial conviction and acquits defendant on the basis of caselaw “fixed insanity” doctrine that a “defendant who manifests a mental disease or defect, as opposed to intoxication, caused by prolonged and chronic alcohol abuse that renders him or her unable to distinguish right from wrong is not responsible for a crime committed while in that condition.”

Edmond v. State, No. 49A04-1012-CR-756, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., July 14, 2011).

July 15, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Odor of burned marijuana on traffic stop driver’s breath conferred probable cause to arrest.

Beeler v. State, No. 49A05-1007-CR-456, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Apr. 27, 2011)

April 29, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, C. Bradford, T. Crone

The transcript contained no admissions by the probationer of the alleged probation violation, and without such admissions the revocation without a hearing would be fundamental error, but as there was a notation in the CCS that an admission was made and this notation was presumptively true, the probationer failed to demonstrate fundamental error.

Raisor v. Carter, No. 49A05-1010-CT-629, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. Ct. App., April 8, 2011)

April 15, 2011 Filed Under: Civil Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

If TR 15(C)’s requirements are met within the statute of limitations, then the last date to file an amended complaint would be 120 days after the statute of limitations has expired.

Sanjari v. State, No. 20A03-1007-CR-384, __ N.E.2d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 11, 2010)

February 18, 2011 Filed Under: Criminal Tagged With: Appeals, T. Crone

Defendant was properly tried in absentia after he refused to leave his cell for trial, when evidence indicated he had been ill due to his hunger strike but was better on the date of trial. Defendant was also properly denied additional continuances near trial and properly required to represent himself, after the court had granted one continuance for defendant’s counsel of choice to obtain admission in Indiana pro hac vice but counsel then submitted two defective requests for admission. Defendant was charged with two counts of criminal nonsupport, one for each of his children, but as there was only a single support order for support in gross, he could be convicted only a a single count of failure to support.

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Go to page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 23
  • Go to page 24
  • Go to page 25
  • Go to page 26
  • Go to page 27
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Go to page 32
  • 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