The Indiana Court of Appeals held that executing a full four-year suspended sentence was disproportionate where technical probation violations coincided with a documented psychiatric crisis.
The Indiana Court of Appeals held that the criminal restitution statute does not authorize reimbursement for a victim’s rental-car expenses.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld drug-dealing and firearm-theft convictions, finding prior transaction messages relevant under Rule 404(b) and the theft evidence sufficient.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a false-informing conviction based on specific, knowingly false accusations against police, distinguishing verifiable claims from protected political rhetoric.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld five challenged child-molesting convictions, ruling that sexual intent could be inferred from the touching, pornography, and consistent testimony about related abuse.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed seven convictions and ordered an insanity acquittal because the only definite expert opinion found insanity and the remaining evidence supplied no probative basis for sanity.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a consent search but held that five of seven convictions impermissibly punished the same criminal transaction, requiring resentencing on the two surviving counts.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed molesting, incest, and attempted-obstruction convictions while construing the post-2022 obstruction statute and applying Wadle.
The Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a Level 1 felony burglary conviction, finding no implied juror bias and sufficient evidence of armed entry, felonious intent, and injury.
The Indiana Court of Appeals held that any error from officers’ recorded comments on McLain’s truthfulness was harmless and affirmed her dealing conviction and advisory sentence.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a new trial for Jason Hubbell, holding that suppressed evidence pointing to another suspect undermined confidence in his murder conviction.
The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed an order barring an alleged victim from testifying, holding that a missing interview recording caused no demonstrated substantial prejudice and no due-process violation without police bad faith.