 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Beaty v. State, No. 71A03-0511-CR-556,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 21, 2006, Decided , November 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Limiting cross-examination of witness regarding specific instances of misconduct which did not involve defendant was not an abuse of discretion, especially where some evidence of prior misconduct was placed before jury. Convictions for two counts of receiving stolen property were upheld where defendant retained items at two separate places.
|
|||||
| Duncan v. State, No. 79S05-0611-CR-451,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, November 21, 2006, Decided , November 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence in the record supported defendant's felony murder conviction, where defendant had given a child one-fourth of a methadone tablet, even though the child, who died from methadone poisoning, was not immediately harmed by the pill. Defendant's dealing was the first step in a chain of events that led to the child's death.
|
|||||
| Hines v. State, No. 20A04-0507-CR-386,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 21, 2006, Decided , November 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in ordering that child molestation defendant undergo a psychosexual evaluation as part of the presentence report. Ind. Code Ann. § 35-38-1-9 contemplated the gathering of information about a defendant's social history and personal habits, and it required that the report include any matters the court directed to be included.
|
|||||
| Prickett v. State, No. 06S04-0509-CR-413,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, November 21, 2006, Decided , November 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 40-year sentence for child molestation under Ind. Code § 35-42-4-3(a), (b) was improper when the sentencing court failed to explain how the enhanced sentence furthered defendant's rehabilitation and defendant's criminal history, probation status, and use of force did not justify the enhanced sentence.
|
|||||
| Arrieta v. State, No. 10A05-0602-CR-92,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 22, 2006, Decided , November 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Indiana Constitution did not require a court to provide an interpreter at government expense for a criminal defendant who had not established indigency. Thus, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion for an interpreter, as he had not shown that he was indigent.
|
|||||
| State v. Jackson, No. 40A05-0601-CR-20,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 22, 2006, Decided , November 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When defendants' case was transferred to another county pursuant to their motion for a change of venue, the receiving court assumed jurisdiction when the clerk received the files, and the speedy trial period began to run. Thus, the trial court properly dismissed the case based on speedy trial grounds under Ind. R. Crim. P. 4(C).
|
|||||
| Voss v. State, No. 49S00-0510-CR-477,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA, November 22, 2006, Decided , November 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a death penalty case, the State's motion under Ind. R. Crim. P. 12(B) did not support a change of judge. The facts that the original judge had held the death penalty statute unconstitutional, that he had emphasized the need for extreme care in death penalty cases, and that he had represented death penalty defendants did not show bias.
|
|||||
| 7-Eleven, Inc. v. Bowens, No. 20A03-0505-CV-201,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 27, 2006, Decided , November 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In neighbors' toxic tort suit regarding the release of gasoline at a gas station, class certification was properly granted under Ind. R. Trial P. 23 because the certification was properly limited to liability and general causation, and the numerosity, typicality, and predominance requirements were satisfied.
|
|||||
| Knowledge A-Z, Inc. v. Sentry Ins., No. 29A04-0604-CV-218,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 27, 2006, Decided , November 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted an insurer summary judgment on its declaratory judgment action against the insured where the insured's contractual requirements to perform specific duties were not optional and the designated evidence showed that the insured's owner did not submit to a requisite examination under oath.
|
|||||
| Terry v. State, No. 49A02-0512-PC-1127,
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, November 27, 2006, Decided , November 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions were affirmed where the trial court properly instructed the jury on the reasonable doubt standard of proof and the trial court properly admitted the in-court identifications of defendant, and therefore any error in the admission of testimony relating to the pre-trial identifications was harmless.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
