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.
41 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2026 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kimberly Heaton v. State of Indianagreen2 sentences2019Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (“[I]f a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.”); Patterson v. State, 659 N.E.2d 220, 222-23 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (“A court has several dispositional options in a revocation proceeding.”). 2018Second, if a violation is proven, “then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.” Heaton v. State, 984 N.E.2d 614, 616 (Ind. 2013). | 6 | 17 |
Woods v. Stategreen2 sentences2026“Second, if a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.” Id. [If the trial court] finds that the person has violated a condition at any time before termination of the period, and the petition to revoke is filed within the probationary period, the court may . . . [o]rder execution of all or part of the sentence that was suspended at the time of initial sentencing. 2020“Second, if a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.” Id. | 3 | 18 |
Patterson v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (“[I]f a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.”); Patterson v. State, 659 N.E.2d 220, 222-23 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (“A court has several dispositional options in a revocation proceeding.”). 2016Heaton, 984 N.E.2d at 616 (“[I]f a violation is found, then the trial court must determine the appropriate sanctions for the violation.”); Patterson v. State, 659 N.E.2d 220, 222-23 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (“A court has several dispositional options in a revocation proceeding.”). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Bobby G. Sealegreen1 sentence1979See United States v. Seale (1972), 461 F.2d 345 . *1173 It is not necessary for us to address Skolnick's allegation that the trial judge's bias disqualified him from presiding at the sanctions hearing. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Beeler v. State
green
2 sentences2014Id. 2013Id. | 2 | 2013–2014 |
Derrian N. Hampton v. State of Indiana
green
1 sentence2019Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Prewitt v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Holder v. State
green
1 sentence2012The trial court indicated “that would’ve been better.” Id. 2 McCullough also alleges the trial court failed to provide a written statement of the evidence relied on and reasons for revoking his probation in violation of his due process rights. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Mayberry v. Pennsylvania
green
2 sentences2008In support of his argument, he directs us to a general rule that where a judge “does not act the instant the contempt is committed, but waits until the end of the trial, on balance, it is generally wise where the marks of the unseemly conduct have left personal stings to ask a fellow judge to take his place.” Mayberry v. Pennsylvania, 400 U.S. 455, 466 , 91 S.Ct. 499 , 27 L.Ed.2d 532 (1971). 2008In support of his argument, he directs us to a general rule that where a judge “does not act the instant the contempt is committed, but waits until the end of the trial, on balance, it is generally wise where the marks of the unseemly conduct have left personal stings to ask a fellow judge to take his place.” Mayberry v. Pennsylvania, 400 U.S. 455, 466 , 91 S.Ct. 499 , 27 L.Ed.2d 532 (1971). | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.