Articles

Fingerprint info now needed in appearance form

The state's Supreme Court has amended Indiana Criminal Rule 2.1 to require the prosecuting attorney to include fingerprint information when filing an appearance form in a criminal proceeding. The amendment takes effect Jan. 1, 2010.

Read More

Justices issue ruling in casino revenue case

The Indiana Supreme Court ruled today on an ongoing appeal about how casino revenue is funneled to a for-profit organization in East Chicago, an issue that has also been raised in an ongoing federal racketeering suit in northern Indiana.

Read More

High court expands Lambert decision

The Indiana Supreme Court issued two opinions today dealing with incarceration being considered as a substantial change in circumstances to justify modifying a child support order and what date a modification may take place.

Read More

House committee split, justice election bill stuck

Legislation aimed at changing how the Indiana Supreme Court justices are chosen hasn't gotten enough support to make it out of committee for now, getting a split vote from lawmakers that means it won't be going to the full House for consideration.

Read More

Supreme Court rules on police traffic stops

The Indiana Supreme Court has held that police don't have to verify whether the description of someone driving a vehicle matches the physical description of the registered owner obtained from a license plate check.

Read More

Jefferson courts granted emergency relief

The Indiana Supreme Court granted emergency relief Thursday to Jefferson County courts pursuant to Administrative Rule 17. Jefferson County trial courts and clerk filed the petition with the high court following a fire that severely damaged the courthouse in Madison.

Read More

High court grants transfer to CHINS case

The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer today to a case dealing with whether a child can be determined to be a child in need of services with respect to one parent, but not the other.

Read More

Justices: Appeal not available after guilty plea

A majority of Indiana Supreme Court justices agreed a man who pleaded guilty couldn't appeal the denial of his pre-trial motion to suppress. Yet one justice believed the plea agreement should have been honored according to its terms, which included reserving the right to object to the denial of the motion to suppress.

Read More

State of the Judiciary touches on economy

The state's top judge this afternoon addressed a joint session of the Indiana General Assembly for the annual State of the Judiciary, focusing on how the courts can help rebuild the state and country's battered confidence caused by economic turmoil. Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard stood before lawmakers and fellow judges in the Indiana House […]

Read More

Justices: Anders withdrawals not allowed

The Indiana Supreme Court has rejected a procedure set up by the nation's top court more than four decades ago that allows attorneys to withdraw from criminal appeals they deem frivolous. Our justices say it's practically and financially more efficient to simply proceed with an appeal and let that process play out.

Read More

High court hears first ‘rocket docket’ appeal

In the first appeal of a juvenile case under Indiana Appellate Rule 14.1, the "rocket docket," the Indiana Supreme Court ruled the juvenile court's determination that a child shouldn't be immediately reunited with his mother until after the school year concluded – contrary to what the Department of Child Services recommended – wasn't clearly erroneous.

Read More

Farming dispute creates first impression issue

In a ruling from the Indiana Supreme Court on an issue of first impression, two of the state's five justices fear a new holding will have far-reaching impact not only on the forfeiture cases at issue, but also mortgage foreclosure cases impacting the commercial and industrial real estate world.

Read More

Court split in public defender ‘firm’ issue

In a disciplinary action released Wednesday by the Indiana Supreme Court, the justices disagreed as to whether two public defenders who worked part time in the same public defender office of Putnam County were "associated in a firm."

Read More