 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Golden v. State, No. 49A05-0608-CR-449,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 19, 2007, Decided , March 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Aggregate 20-year sentence for sexual molestation offenses was proper under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1 because, inter alia, defendant's prior molestation convictions and his conviction for vicarious sexual gratification directly related to his present offense, as they established a long history of sexual misconduct with children.
|
|||||
| Howard v. State, No. 82A01-0605-CR-219,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 19, 2007, Decided , March 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officers were not allowed to order defendant from car and conduct pat down search because, before ordering defendant from his car, officer recognized that driver was defendant, not individual with warrants who officers were pursuing, and there were no officer safety concerns. Evidence should have been suppressed under Ind. Const. art. I, § 11.
|
|||||
| State v. Foy, No. 68A05-0605-CR-235,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 19, 2007, Decided , March 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's ruling granting defendant's motion to suppress was reversed because search warrant was sufficiently particular; search warrant allowing search of particular locations for "any and all trace evidence" was not an impermissible general warrant, as warrant was not without limitation in regard to discretion of police executing warrant.
|
|||||
| Edwards v. State, No. 49A02-0605-CR-414,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 20, 2007, Decided , March 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The interception of defendant's telephone calls from jail did not violate the Indiana Wiretap Act. Under Ind. Code § 35-33.5-1-5, a receiver of a call could consent to its recording, and it could be inferred that by accepting defendant's call after having heard a message that it could be recorded or monitored, the recipients had given such consent.
|
|||||
| Gordon v. Purdue Univ., No. 79A02-0606-CV-457,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 20, 2007, Decided , March 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former doctoral student's complaint of bad faith breach of contract against a university did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The facts did not show the conscious doing of a wrong because of dishonest purpose or moral obliquity or a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or ill will.
|
|||||
| Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Home Loan Corp., No. 49A05-0606-CV-332,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 20, 2007, Decided , March 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in denying summary judgment to an insurance company on a claim by a mortgage company to recover on a surety bond, as summary judgment was granted to the insurance company in a similar action by the mortgage company, and collateral estoppel was applicable to simultaneous proceedings such as the two cases in question.
|
|||||
| McQueen v. State, No. 33A01-0607-CR-304,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 20, 2007, Decided , March 20, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant admitted taking a drug containing oxycodone in violation of work release center rules, he could not show fundamental error in the admission of testimony regarding the results of a toxicology report. Also, violation of a condition of community corrections did not constitute an offense within the purview of double jeopardy analysis.
|
|||||
| Bennett v. State, No. 45A05-0604-CR-220,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 21, 2007, Decided , March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in sentencing defendant to serve time in prison and to probation rather than placing him on probation for entire term of his sentence despite his lack of criminal history; his sentence was appropriate given the nature of the offenses and his character, and the trial court considered the relevant factors in sentencing him.
|
|||||
| Huntington v. Riggs, No. 69A01-0607-CV-318,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 21, 2007, Decided , March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a property dispute, plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment based on the doctrine of title by acquiescence. Since 1953, plaintiff's family and defendants' predecessors in title had acted as if a county road had marked their boundary line and had in effect treated the road as establishing a fence; this agreement was binding on defendants.
|
|||||
| Parks v. Del. County Dep't of Child Servs., No. 18A02-0607-JV-597,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, March 21, 2007, Decided , March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While trial court was not required to make findings of fact in termination of parental rights case of the mother and father, its failure to make findings supporting judgment pursuant to Ind. R. Trial P. 52(A) once it undertook to make findings meant their case had to be remanded to trial court for proper findings of fact and conclusions of law.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
