 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abdullah v. State, No. 49A05-0505-CR-300,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, May 25, 2006, Decided , May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Ind. R. Trial P. 58 required that an abstract of judgment be signed by the judge who ordered the conviction. Accordingly, when an unsigned abstract was the only evidence offered to prove that defendant was a serious violent felon and a habitual offender under Ind. Code §§ 35-47-4-5(c) and 35-38-1-3, his conviction and enhancement could not stand.
|
|||||
| Ables v. State, No. 45A03-0601-CR-16,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, THIRD DISTRICT, May 25, 2006, Decided , May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In sentencing under Ind. Code § 35-50-2-2, trial court properly found that defendant possessed a gun. Defendant's knowledge of the gun was shown by her admission that it was in the center console of her car and her reaching down when she saw officers, and its close proximity and her reaching showed that she was able to reduce it to her possession.
|
|||||
| Bridgeforth v. Thornton, No. 49A05-0505-CV-00288,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, FIFTH DISTRICT, May 25, 2006, Decided , May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not resolve dispute over church property merely by reinstalling two church trustees and a church clerk to their official positions and then ordering a election be held so congregation could determine whether they should be removed from office, and, thus, the trial court was not divested of jurisdiction to rule on dispute before it.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
