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.
24 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1871–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Creech v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Being told at the close of the hearing that he could appeal presumably had no effect on that transaction.” Id. 2019Being told at the close of the hearing that he could appeal presumably had no effect on that transaction.” Creech, 887 N.E.2d at 77 . | 4 | 13 |
Ricci v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Cf. Ricci v. State, 894 N.E.2d 1089 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (holding that the trial court’s erroneous statements regarding ability to appeal made at the time of the entry of the plea did negate the waiver of the right to appeal in the plea), trans. denied. [8] Zbyrowski waived his right to appeal “on any grounds” as a part of the negotiated plea. 2018Being told at the close of the hearing that he could appeal presumably had no effect on that transaction.” Id. at 77. [8] Crafton relies on Ricci v. State, 894 N.E.2d 1089 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008), trans. denied, and Bonilla v. State, 907 N.E.2d 586 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), trans. denied, but both cases are factually distinguishable from his case. | 3 | 5 |
Dipert v. Stategreen2 sentences1998See Dipert v. State, 259 Ind. 260, 263 , 286 N.E.2d 405, 407 (1972) (holding that the weight to be given a statement against interest is to be determined by the jury); see also Moore v. Funk, 155 Ind.App. 545, 555 , 293 N.E.2d 534, 539 (1973). 1998See Dipert v. State, 259 Ind. 260, 263 , 286 N.E.2d 405, 407 (1972) (holding that the weight to be given a statement against interest is to be determined by the jury); see also Moore v. Funk, 155 Ind.App. 545, 555 , 293 N.E.2d 534, 539 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Funkgreen2 sentences1998See Dipert v. State, 259 Ind. 260, 263 , 286 N.E.2d 405, 407 (1972) (holding that the weight to be given a statement against interest is to be determined by the jury); see also Moore v. Funk, 155 Ind.App. 545, 555 , 293 N.E.2d 534, 539 (1973). 1998See Dipert v. State, 259 Ind. 260, 263 , 286 N.E.2d 405, 407 (1972) (holding that the weight to be given a statement against interest is to be determined by the jury); see also Moore v. Funk, 155 Ind.App. 545, 555 , 293 N.E.2d 534, 539 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bonilla v. State
green
1 sentence2018Being told at the close of the hearing that he could appeal presumably had no effect on that transaction.” Id. at 77. [8] Crafton relies on Ricci v. State, 894 N.E.2d 1089 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008), trans. denied, and Bonilla v. State, 907 N.E.2d 586 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), trans. denied, but both cases are factually distinguishable from his case. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State of Indiana v. Tammy Sue Harper
green
1 sentence2016At the close of the hearing, the trial court reiterated its inclination to grant the petition and directed the prosecutor’s office to give its input “in the near future” or “in the next week or so.” Id. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Perry v. State
green
2 sentences1992“Unless a petitioner has knowledge of a defect in his conviction or of the means to seek relief from the conviction, he can seldom be said to have delayed unreasonably in seeking relief.” Perry, supra, at 843 . 1992"Unless a petitioner has knowledge of a defect in his conviction or of the means to seek relief from the conviction, he can seldom be said to have delayed unreasonably in seeking relief." Perry, supra, at 843 . | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Indianapolis & Western Railway Co. v. Ragan
neutral
1 sentence1910Co. v. Ragan, supra, also provided that “all instructions requested, whether given or refused, and all instructions given by the court of its own motion, shall be filed with the clerk of the court at the close of the instruction of the jury.” Relating to the use of original bills of exceptions on appeal, §657 Burns 1908, Acts 1897, p. 244, provides that original bills containing the evidence may be made a part of the record where “it shall appear from the record that such bill was presented to the proper judge of the trial court for settlement and signature within the time permitted by law and | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Dunn
neutral
1 sentence1909Co. v. Dunn (1894), 138 Ind. 18 , this court said: “Under the code and the recognized practice of this State, there are three methods of making instructions a part of the record: (1) By an order of court; (2) by special exceptions written upon the margin or following each instruction and signed by the judge; (3) by a general bill of exceptions. | 1 | 1909–1909 |
Speck v. Kenoyer
green
1 sentence1905Speck v. Kenoyer (1905), 164 Ind. 431 . | 1 | 1905–1905 |
Childress v. Callender
neutral
1 sentence1901Butler v. Roberts, 118 Ind. 481 ; Childress v. Callender, 108 Ind. 394 ; Van Sickle v. Belknap, 129 Ind. 558, 562 ; Elliott’s App. Proc. §792; Ewbank’s Manual §§27, 36; Killion v. Hulen, 8 Ind. App. 494, 496 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Butler v. Roberts
neutral
1 sentence1901Butler v. Roberts, 118 Ind. 481 ; Childress v. Callender, 108 Ind. 394 ; Van Sickle v. Belknap, 129 Ind. 558, 562 ; Elliott’s App. Proc. §792; Ewbank’s Manual §§27, 36; Killion v. Hulen, 8 Ind. App. 494, 496 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Van Sickle v. Belknap
neutral
1 sentence1901Butler v. Roberts, 118 Ind. 481 ; Childress v. Callender, 108 Ind. 394 ; Van Sickle v. Belknap, 129 Ind. 558, 562 ; Elliott’s App. Proc. §792; Ewbank’s Manual §§27, 36; Killion v. Hulen, 8 Ind. App. 494, 496 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Killion v. Hulen
neutral
1 sentence1901Butler v. Roberts, 118 Ind. 481 ; Childress v. Callender, 108 Ind. 394 ; Van Sickle v. Belknap, 129 Ind. 558, 562 ; Elliott’s App. Proc. §792; Ewbank’s Manual §§27, 36; Killion v. Hulen, 8 Ind. App. 494, 496 . | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Leverich v. State
green
1 sentence1891Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Hollingsworth v. State, 111 Ind. 289 ; Brown v. State, 111 Ind. 441; Delhaney v. State, 115 Ind. 499 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 . “ The exceptions must be taken at the time of the trial.” Section 1847, R. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Hollingsworth v. State
neutral
1 sentence1891Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Hollingsworth v. State, 111 Ind. 289 ; Brown v. State, 111 Ind. 441; Delhaney v. State, 115 Ind. 499 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 . “ The exceptions must be taken at the time of the trial.” Section 1847, R. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Brown v. State
green
1 sentence1891Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Hollingsworth v. State, 111 Ind. 289 ; Brown v. State, 111 Ind. 441; Delhaney v. State, 115 Ind. 499 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 . “ The exceptions must be taken at the time of the trial.” Section 1847, R. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Delhaney v. State
neutral
1 sentence1891Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Hollingsworth v. State, 111 Ind. 289 ; Brown v. State, 111 Ind. 441; Delhaney v. State, 115 Ind. 499 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 . “ The exceptions must be taken at the time of the trial.” Section 1847, R. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
Meredith v. State
green
1 sentence1891Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Hollingsworth v. State, 111 Ind. 289 ; Brown v. State, 111 Ind. 441; Delhaney v. State, 115 Ind. 499 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 . “ The exceptions must be taken at the time of the trial.” Section 1847, R. | 1 | 1891–1891 |
State ex rel. May v. Rabourn
neutral
1 sentence1871This court, in the case of The State v. Rabourn, 14 Ind. 300 , held that the exception to the instruction given was not properly taken, for the reason that the exception related to the time of the filing of the bill of exceptions, and not to the time when the decision was made. | 1 | 1871–1871 |
Cross v. Pearson
neutral
1 sentence1871Overstreet & Hunter, Banta & Byfield, attorneys for defendant.” ' It is contended by the appellee that an instruction refused can only be made a part of the record by a bill of exceptions, or authenticated by the signature of the judge who presided at the trial, and in support of this position reference is made to the case of Cross v. Pearson, 17 Ind. 612 . | 1 | 1871–1871 |
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.