 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Mathis v. State, No. 49A02-0604-CR-316,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 18, 2007, Decided , January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for battery, Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(1)(A), was supported by sufficient evidence under circumstances in which the victim testified that defendant pushed her against a door, pushed her on sofa and laid on her, grabbed her hair, and hit her in the head, causing her to "hurt" and "kinda see stars for a second."
|
|||||
| Maynard v. State, No. 30A05-0605-CR-273,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 18, 2007, Decided , January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Superior court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss because a town marshal, who was out of uniform and without a badge, did not violate Ind. Code § 9-30-2-2 when he invoked the assistance of the State of Indiana to file charges and arrest defendant on a bench warrant as he did not personally engage with defendant.
|
|||||
| In re Lowry , Case No. 49S00-0610-CO-365,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, January 22, 2007, Decided , January 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Lawyer was suspended for 120 days under circumstances in which he had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in violation of Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 29, § 10(b) while suspended for failure to obtain requisite continuing legal education.
|
|||||
| Biddle v. BAA Indianapolis, LLC, No. 32S05-0602-CV-33,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, January 23, 2007, Decided , January 23, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Homeowners had not shown that airport noise constituted a taking under the Fifth Amendment. The flight altitudes alleged were several times higher than the minimum navigable airspace, and while the noise was no doubt considerable, it did not practically destruct or substantially impair homeowners' use of their properties.
|
|||||
| Blake v. State, No. 49A02-0605-CR-369,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 24, 2007, Decided , January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When defendant received a gubernatorial pardon, he was entitled to have his record of conviction expunged, but not his arrest record. No statute provided for such a procedure, and the majority of states held that a pardon did not entitle a defendant to expunction of all criminal records related to the conviction.
|
|||||
| C.D.H. v. State, No. 71A04-0503-JV-125,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 24, 2007, Decided , January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Adjudication of juvenile delinquency based on finding defendant committed an act that if committed by an adult would be the criminal offense of child molesting, as a Class C felony was reversed because the record contained insufficient evidence to support a finding that defendant was older than the victim, a requirement of Ind. Code § 35-42-4-3(b).
|
|||||
| Robertson v. State, No. 49A05-0512-CR-731,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 24, 2007, Decided , January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of theft, in violation of Ind. Code § 35-43-4-2, but the trial court erred when it imposed an enhanced and consecutive sentence on defendant's theft conviction; in imposing the consecutive sentence pursuant to Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2, the trial court had to impose the lower, appropriate advisory sentence.
|
|||||
| Vance v. State, No. 18A02-0606-CR-468,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, January 24, 2007, Decided , January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a battery case, any error by the trial court in overruling defendant's objection to an allegedly leading question during the State's direct examination of the primary victim was harmless, where the challenged testimony was merely cumulative of the victim's testimony on cross-examination, to which defendant made no objection.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
