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.
7 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Blackman v. Stategreen2 sentences2015The Indiana Supreme Court’s holding in J.D. and our conclusion in Dallaly are in line with the previously stated belief that police officers conducting a legitimate investigation “must be able to perform their duties without unreasonable interruption.” Anderson v. State, 881 N.E.2d 86, 91 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (quoting Blackman, 868 N.E.2d at 588 ). [21] Here, the record provides that Tyler’s expressions interfered with Officer Leinberger’s legitimate attempt to verify that Brownie was the owner of the damaged vehicle that had been abandoned by Brownie’s cousin on the side of the road. 2010Blackman v. State, 868 N.E.2d 579, 584 (Ind.Ct.App.2007), trans. denied. | 1 | 2 |
Anderson v. Stategreen1 sentence2015The Indiana Supreme Court’s holding in J.D. and our conclusion in Dallaly are in line with the previously stated belief that police officers conducting a legitimate investigation “must be able to perform their duties without unreasonable interruption.” Anderson v. State, 881 N.E.2d 86, 91 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (quoting Blackman, 868 N.E.2d at 588 ). [21] Here, the record provides that Tyler’s expressions interfered with Officer Leinberger’s legitimate attempt to verify that Brownie was the owner of the damaged vehicle that had been abandoned by Brownie’s cousin on the side of the road. | 1 | 1 |
Martin v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See Martin, 908 N.E.2d at 288-289 (holding that even if defendant's speech was found to be political, defendant abused his free speech rights by creating "more than a mere fleeting annoyance"); Madden, 786 N.E.2d at 1157 (holding that defendant's conduct "created a harm that [rose] above the level of a fleeting annoyance," causing "particularized harm"). | 1 | 1 |
Madden v. Stategreen1 sentence2009See Martin, 908 N.E.2d at 288-289 (holding that even if defendant's speech was found to be political, defendant abused his free speech rights by creating "more than a mere fleeting annoyance"); Madden, 786 N.E.2d at 1157 (holding that defendant's conduct "created a harm that [rose] above the level of a fleeting annoyance," causing "particularized harm"). | 1 | 1 |
Lach v. Lake Countygreen1 sentence2006Cantrell argues that the Court of Appeals recognized an implied private right of action under Article I, Section 9 of the Indiana Constitution in Lach v. Lake County, 621 N.E.2d 357, 358-60 (Ind.Ct.App.1993), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dallaly v. State
green
1 sentence2015Similarly, in Dallaly, we concluded that because Dallaly’s speech interfered with the duties of the police officers at the scene, Dallaly abused his free speech rights under Article 1, section 9. 916 N.E.2d at 954 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Cantrell v. Morris
green
2 sentences2014The Cantrell court held that, "whether or not ... the Indiana Constitution affords any protection to public employees under some circumstances, a terminated employee has no private right of action for damages that arise under that Section.” 849 N.E.2d at 492 . 2014We recognize that this portion of the holding in Hoagland could be read to conflict with the opinion of our supreme court in Cantrell, supra. In Cantrell , the court answered a certified question from a federal district court regarding whether a public defender who was terminated from his position could maintain a private right of action under the free-speech provisions of Article 1, Section 9 of the Indiana Constitution. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
J.D. v. State
green
2 sentences2007In J.D. v. State, 859 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 2007), our Supreme Court held that speech, albeit political, was not entitled to constitutional protection under Article I, Section 9 of the Indiana Constitution where the speech “consisted of persistent loud yelling over and obscuring of [the arresting officer’s] attempts to speak and function as a law officer.” Id. at 344 . 2007In J.D. v. State, 859 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 2007), our Supreme Court held that speech, albeit political, was not entitled to constitutional protection under Article I, Section 9 of the Indiana Constitution where the speech “consisted of persistent loud yelling over and obscuring of [the arresting officer’s] attempts to speak and function as a law officer.” Id. at 344 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Whittington v. State
green
2 sentences1999Section 9 provides: “No law shall be passed, restraining the free interchange of thought and opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print, freely, on any subject whatever: but for the abuse of that right, every person shall be responsible.” In Whittington , our supreme court created a two-step inquiry for reviewing the constitutionality of an application of the disorderly conduct statute under § 9. 669 N.E.2d at 1367 . 1999Section 9 provides: "No law shall be passed, restraining the free interchange of thought and opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print, freely, on any subject whatever: but for the abuse of that right, every person shall be responsible." In Whittington , our supreme court created a two-step inquiry for reviewing the constitutionality of an application of the disorderly conduct statute under § 9. 669 N.E.2d at 1367 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.