 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Anglemyer v. State, No. 43S05-0606-CR-230,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because, even with judicial findings of aggravating circumstances, it was impossible under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1 to increase the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum. Further, defendant did not show an abuse of discretion as to the sentence in a review under Ind. R. App. P. 7(B).
|
|||||
| Blackman v. State, No. 49A02-0610-CR-893,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's arrest for disorderly conduct, under Ind. Code § 35-45-1-3, did not violate Ind. Const. art. 1, § 9 as her conduct constituted an abuse of right to speak and fell within State's police power because defendant obstructed and interfered with officers' attempts to function as law enforcement officers. Defendant's conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Clarke v. State, No. 49S05-0612-CR-496,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a police officer could ask defendant for permission to search his vehicle without implicating the Fourth Amendment or Ind. Const. art. 1, § 11, and because defendant's body language and response indicated a consent to the search, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress.
|
|||||
| In re Atanga, Supreme Court Cause No. 49S00-9702-DI-154,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an attorney had not paid his clients in full, pursuant to Ind. R. Admis. Bar & Disc. Att'ys 23(17.2), his probation would be revoked and he would be suspended from the practice of law for not less than six months unless the Disciplinary Commission filed a report stating that the clients had been paid in full.
|
|||||
| Israel v. Ind. Dep't of Corr., No. 46S03-0706-CV-253,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court should have dismissed, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, an inmate's action, which challenged withdrawal of funds from his trust account, because restitution was a prison disciplinary sanction, an action related to an offender within Indiana DOC's jurisdiction under Ind. Code § 4-21.5-2-5(6), and not subject to judicial review.
|
|||||
| Jackson v. State, No. 15S01-0609-CR-333,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's right to be present at trial under U.S. Const. amend. VI and Ind. Const. art. I, § 13, was not violated because defendant was clearly informed of trial date and he never contacted trial court prior to trial to address any confusion about date or to indicate that he was unable to hire trial counsel so that waiver was willful and knowing.
|
|||||
| Kosciusko County Prop. Tax Assessment Bd. of Appeals v. Hime's-Miller's & Strombeck's 3rd Additions, Inc., Cause No. 49T10-0605-TA-50,
INDIANA TAX COURT, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Indiana Board of Tax Review's determination granting a parcel owner an exemption under Ind. Code § 6-1.1-10-16(c)(3) (2004) was affirmed where the county tax assessment board had neither overcome the presumption of the statue's constitutionality nor demonstrated that the application of the statute was erroneous.
|
|||||
| McDonald v. State, No. 20S03-0706-CR-252,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's findings supported the sentence imposed because the sentencing factors included that defendant committed multiple crimes, participated in both murder and conspiracy to commit murder, and had a history of juvenile arrests and delinquency adjudications, which were proper aggravators under Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1.
|
|||||
| Putnamville Corr. Facility v. Church, No. 67A04-0611-CV-658,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court lacked jurisdiction to judicially enforce workers' compensation award because Ind. Code § 22-3-4-9(a) (2005) required not only that employee give employer five days' notice before filing a petition with the trial court but also that she obtain an order from the Indiana Workers' Compensation Board prior to seeking judicial enforcement.
|
|||||
| Tyson v. State, No. 49A04-0608-PC-419,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, June 26, 2007, Decided, June 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Prisoner's petition for post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel was properly dismissed summarily under Ind. R.P. Post-Conviction Remedies 1, § 4(f), rather than Ind. R. Trial P. 41(E), because with nothing more than a conclusory allegation and without specific factual allegations, an evidentiary hearing was not required.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
