The Indiana Supreme Court once again granted transfer in two cases dealing with issues of modified fixed-plea sentences, hearing back-to-back oral arguments last week. The arguments come after appellate panels reached differing conclusions.
It began in July 2017, when Katelin Seo was arrested on stalking-related charges and ordered to unlock her cellphone as part of the criminal investigation. Seo refused, invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and a flurry of constitutional and technology-related questions ensued.
The Indiana Court of Appeals will travel to Evansville on Monday to hear arguments in a case involving the denial of a man’s request for access to public records.
In back-to-back oral arguments, the Indiana Supreme Court considered whether to grant transfer in two medical malpractice cases seemingly in conflict with each other. The debate: whether Indiana Code § 23-0.5-4-12 is a validly enacted statute or a nullity under the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Trial Rule 75(A)(4) regarding venue.
A dispute that could have a far-reaching impact on the sizable rent-to-own housing market in the Hoosier state was presented to the Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday morning with attorneys arguing over the nature of the rent-to-own contract.
An Indianapolis man is again petitioning for the return of his 51 confiscated firearms after a judge previously determined him dangerous due to his bizarre behavior near a Bloomington bar. But an Indiana Court of Appeals panel Tuesday seemed to struggle with the argument that he was still dangerous six years later.
The 7th Circuit did something historic recently — an Indiana case involving Purdue University marked the first time the appellate court turned on the cameras and recorded video of an oral argument.
As Indiana’s executive and legislative branches work to implement reforms in the Department of Child Services and boost funding, the judicial branch is also reviewing the department in a case that could decide whether child welfare cases are subject to res judicata.
Indiana Supreme Court Justices heard oral argument in two cases Thursday, beginning with a man who argued there was insufficient evidence to sustain his triple-murder conviction and that certain evidence was improperly admitted.
Counsel for a man sentenced to death for two separate murders and 65 years in prison for a third argued his representation was ineffective in the first two cases when prior counsel failed to adequately investigate and present evidence of a traumatic brain injury the man had sustained.
The Indiana Supreme Court is set to hear argument in several cases this week, including a man’s post-conviction appeal of his three separate sentences for murder in Floyd County.
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear arguments this week in a murder case and on two post-conviction petitions.
An Indiana case that could decide whether the Eighth Amendment protection against excessive fines applies to the states will be heard at the United States Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The Indiana Supreme Court heard argument Tuesday contending the appointment of a deceased man’s father as the special administrator of his wrongful-death estate should not have been reconsidered, despite counter-arguments that he was not the best fit for the appointment.
The Indiana Court of Appeals will hear traveling arguments in two cases this week, starting Tuesday in Bartholomew County with a case involving a drug-dealing conviction.
The Supreme Court seemed skeptical of arguments by companies seeking to overturn a decades-old ban on uranium mining in Virginia. The commonwealth has had a ban on uranium mining since the 1980s.
The Indiana Supreme Court heard oral argument Thursday morning on a utility rate increase case, hearing a northern Indiana utility industrial group’s appeal over whether a reversal of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission’s application of its own settlement orders conflicted with a prior settlement.
The Indiana Supreme Court granted one transfer request and denied 18 others last week, agreeing to hear argument as to whether content found on the phone of a man convicted of sexual misconduct with a minor is considered obscene under an Indiana statute.
The Indiana Supreme Court heard oral argument Thursday morning on a product liability case, hearing a national motor company’s appeal in a matter involving a worker’s death that includes defective design claims.
Contrary readings of Article 8, Section 2 of the Indiana Constitution and its implication on Indiana’s civil forfeiture statute were at issue Thursday when the Indiana Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case brought by the Virginia-based Institute for Justice.