Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Desmond Turner v. State of Indianagreen1 sentence2015Turner v. State, 953 N.E.2d 1039, 1059 (Ind. 2011). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Speybroeck v. State
green
2 sentences2016Speybroeck, 875 N.E.2d at 822 . 2016Speybroeck, 875 N.E.2d at 822 . | 2 | 2016–2016 |
Boatner v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. [14] For all of these reasons, the trial court acted within its discretion when it determined that Jasmine placed the 911 call while under the stress of excitement caused by the startling event and admitted the 911 call into evidence under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. [15] Even if the trial court erred in admitting the 911 call into evidence, we will not reverse the convictions if the error was harmless. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Ryle v. State
green
1 sentence2013Finally, Jones asks this Court to reconsider our Supreme Court’s holding in Ryle v. State, 842 N.E.2d 320 (Ind. 2005), that juvenile adjudications fall within the prior convictions exception and do not have to be submitted to the jury before they can be used to enhance a sentence. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
United States v. Edward Rodriguez, A/K/A Rick, Thomas J. Albernaz, Peter Smigowski, and William John Martins
green
1 sentence1981United States v. Rodriquez, (5th Cir. 1980) 612 F.2d 906 ; United States v. Marotta, (9th Cir. 1975) 518 F.2d 681 . 5 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
United States v. Thomas Nicholas Marotta
green
1 sentence1981United States v. Rodriquez, (5th Cir. 1980) 612 F.2d 906 ; United States v. Marotta, (9th Cir. 1975) 518 F.2d 681 . 5 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.