need instruction (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

need instruction in Indiana

23 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2020 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.

Followed or applied (24)

CaseFollowedCited
Jones v. Wolfgreen
scotus · 1979 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012In this respect, Indiana courts should apply neutral principles of Indiana trust and property law without regard to the organizational structure of the religious denomination, id. at 605 , 99 S.Ct. at 3026 , 61 L.Ed.2d at 786 (“The neutral-principles approach ... obviates entirely the need for an analysis or examination of ecclesiastical polity or doctrine in settling church property disputes.”), whether interpreting the language of a deed or conveyance or determining whether there exists an express or implied (constructive or resulting) trust. 10 2.

2012In this respect, Indiana courts should apply neutral principles of Indiana trust and property law without regard to the organizational structure of the religious denomination, id. at 605 , 99 S.Ct. at 3026 , 61 L.Ed.2d at 786 (“The neutral-principles approach ... obviates entirely the need for an analysis or examination of ecclesiastical polity or doctrine in settling church property disputes.”), whether interpreting the language of a deed or conveyance or determining whether there exists an express or implied (constructive or resulting) trust. 10 2.

22
Ditto v. Martingreen
indctapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020They assert the court’s July 25, 2019 order contains no finding of an emergency as required by Ind. Code § 29-1-10-6 to circumvent the need for a hearing. [15] Generally, “[t]he probate court has great latitude and wide discretion in matters concerning the appointment and removal of executors.” Matter of Estate of Runyan, 557 N.E.2d 1353, 1356 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) (citing Estate of Jaworski v. Jaworski, 479 N.E.2d 89 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985), reh’g denied, trans. denied).

11
Conner v. Stategreen
ind · 1999 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017There are only a few situations that justify such an extreme measure: (1) when counsel is completely denied; (2) when counsel wholly fails to subject the prosecution’s case to meaningful adversarial testing; and (3) when circumstances are such that “the likelihood that any lawyer, even a fully competent one, could provide effective assistance is so small that a presumption of prejudice is appropriate without inquiry into the actual conduct of the trial.” Conner v. State, 711 N.E.2d 1238, 1254 (Ind. 1999) (quoting Cronic, 466 U.S. at 659-60 ). [14] Acuna-Hinojosa argues that he was completely d

11
Wantland v. Stategreen
ind · 1896 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Hampton v. Stategreen
ind · 1903 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Dunn v. Stategreen
ind · 1906 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Robinson v. Stategreen
ind · 1919 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Spears v. Statered
ind · 1980 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Lloyd v. Stategreen
ind · 1996 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Cox v. Stategreen
ind · 1985 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Stahl v. Stategreen
ind · 1993 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
McAdams v. Stategreen
ind · 1948 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Gears v. Stategreen
ind · 1932 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Wolfe v. Stategreen
ind · 1928 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Myers v. Stategreen
ind · 1989 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Gambill v. Stategreen
ind · 1996 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

11
Godby v. Stategreen
indctapp · 2004 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009"An evidentiary hearing is not necessary when the pleadings show only issues of law; [the need for a hearing is not avoided, however, when a determination of the issues hinges, in whole or in part, upon facts not resolved." Godby v. State, 809 N.E.2d 480, 482 (Ind.Ct.App.2004).

11
Gaskins v. Stategreen
indctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008In re Kay L., 867 N.E.2d at 242.

11
In Re Involuntary Terminationgreen
indctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008In re Kay L., 867 N.E.2d at 242.

11
United States v. Pardogreen
cadc · 1980 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
2 sentences

2002The reasoning is that "since promises to dismiss charges as part of a plea agreement are binding on the Government, a witness may not be exposed to prosecution on those charges, and the need for the privilege is lost." Id. (quoting United States v. Pardo, 636 F.2d 535, 543 (D.C.Cir.1980)).

2002The reasoning is that “since promises to dismiss charges as part of a plea agreement are binding on the Government, a witness may not be exposed to prosecution on those charges, and the need for the privilege is lost.” Id. (quoting United States v. Pardo, 636 F.2d 535, 543 (D.C.Cir.1980)).

11
CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Easterwoodred
scotus · 1993 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996See, e.g., CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Easterwood, 507 U.S. 658, 673, n. 12 , 113 S.Ct. 1732 , 1742 n. 12, 123 L.Ed.2d 387 (1993) ("We reject petitioner's claim of implied `conflict' pre-emption ... on the basis of the preceding analysis.") At best, Cipollone supports an inference that an express pre-emption clause forecloses implied pre-emption; it does not establish a rule. ___ U.S. at___, 115 S.Ct. at 1488 .

1996See, e.g., CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Easterwood, 507 U.S. 658, 673, n. 12 , 113 S.Ct. 1732 , 1742 n. 12, 123 L.Ed.2d 387 (1993) ("We reject petitioner's claim of implied `conflict' pre-emption ... on the basis of the preceding analysis.") At best, Cipollone supports an inference that an express pre-emption clause forecloses implied pre-emption; it does not establish a rule. ___ U.S. at___, 115 S.Ct. at 1488 .

11
Armstead v. Stategreen
indctapp · 1992 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996Armstead v. State, 596 N.E.2d 291, 292 (Ind.Ct.App.1992).

1996Armstead v. State, 596 N.E.2d 291, 292 (Ind.Ct.App.1992).

11
Purcell v. Stategreen
indctapp · 1975 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
11
Stone v. Stategreen
ind · 1978 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (20)

CaseCitedYears
Gann v. State green
indctapp · 1990
2 sentences

2020Id.

2019Id.

41992–2020
Blythe v. State green
ind · 1978
2 sentences

1980We noted in Blythe that “[i]t is altogether reasonable to conclude that once jurisdiction vests in the Circuit Court or Criminal Court ... by virtue of a waiver issued under Ind.Code § 31-5-7-14 . such jurisdiction would extend to the lesser included offenses and crimes of a lesser degree.” Id. 373 N.E.2d at 1100 .

1980We noted in Blythe that “[i]t is altogether reasonable to conclude that once jurisdiction vests in the Circuit Court or Criminal Court... by virtue of a waiver issued under Ind. Code § 31-5-7-14 ... such jurisdiction would extend to the lesser-included offenses and crimes of a lesser degree.” Id. at 100 , 373 N.E.2d at 1100 .

21980–1980
Dull v. State green
ind · 1962
2 sentences

1980Dull v. State, (1962) 242 Ind. 633 , 180 N.E.2d 523 .” In Blythe v. State, we distinguished the situation with which we are presented here: whether the waiver hearing on one offense obviates the need for a hearing concerning a subsequently charged lesser-included offense.

1980Dull v. State, (1962) 242 Ind. 633 , 180 N.E.2d 523 .” In Blythe v. State, we distinguished the situation with which we are presented here: whether the waiver hearing on one offense obviates the need for a hearing concerning a subsequently charged lesser-included offense.

21980–1980
Estate of Jaworski v. Jaworski green
indctapp · 1985
1 sentence

2020They assert the court’s July 25, 2019 order contains no finding of an emergency as required by Ind. Code § 29-1-10-6 to circumvent the need for a hearing. [15] Generally, “[t]he probate court has great latitude and wide discretion in matters concerning the appointment and removal of executors.” Matter of Estate of Runyan, 557 N.E.2d 1353, 1356 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) (citing Estate of Jaworski v. Jaworski, 479 N.E.2d 89 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985), reh’g denied, trans. denied).

12020–2020
United States v. Cronic green
scotus · 1984
1 sentence

2017There are only a few situations that justify such an extreme measure: (1) when counsel is completely denied; (2) when counsel wholly fails to subject the prosecution’s case to meaningful adversarial testing; and (3) when circumstances are such that “the likelihood that any lawyer, even a fully competent one, could provide effective assistance is so small that a presumption of prejudice is appropriate without inquiry into the actual conduct of the trial.” Conner v. State, 711 N.E.2d 1238, 1254 (Ind. 1999) (quoting Cronic, 466 U.S. at 659-60 ). [14] Acuna-Hinojosa argues that he was completely d

12017–2017
Hicks v. State green
ind · 1989
1 sentence

2012See, e.g., Gambill v. State, 675 N.E.2d 668, 675 (Ind.1996); Lloyd v. State, 669 N.E.2d 980, 985 (Ind.1996); Stahl v. State, 616 N.E.2d 9, 11-12 (Ind.1993); Myers v. State, 532 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (Ind.1989); Cox v. State, 475 N.E.2d 664, 666-68 (Ind.1985); Spears v. State, 272 Ind. 634, 636-40 , 401 N.E.2d 331, 334-35 (1980), overruled on other grounds by Hicks v. State, 544 N.E.2d 500 (Ind.1989); McAdams v. State, 226 Ind. 403, 412 , 81 N.E.2d 671, 675 (1948); Gears v. State, 203 Ind. 400, 407-08 , 180 N.E. 592, 594-95 (1932); Wolfe v. State, 200 Ind. 557, 564-68 , 159 N.E. 545, 547-49 (1928);

12012–2012
United States v. Michael Smith green
ca6 · 2001
2 sentences

2002The reasoning is that "since promises to dismiss charges as part of a plea agreement are binding on the Government, a witness may not be exposed to prosecution on those charges, and the need for the privilege is lost." Id. (quoting United States v. Pardo, 636 F.2d 535, 543 (D.C.Cir.1980)).

2002The reasoning is that “since promises to dismiss charges as part of a plea agreement are binding on the Government, a witness may not be exposed to prosecution on those charges, and the need for the privilege is lost.” Id. (quoting United States v. Pardo, 636 F.2d 535, 543 (D.C.Cir.1980)).

12002–2002
Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton green
scotus · 1995
2 sentences

2002Cf. id. at 685 , 115 S.Ct. 2386 (O'Connor, J., dissenting) (criticizing the school district's decision to test student athletes as "a choice that appears to have been driven more by a belief in what would pass constitutional muster ... than by a belief in what was required to meet the District's principal disciplinary concern.").

2002Cf. id. at 685 , 115 S.Ct. 2386 (O'Connor, J., dissenting) (criticizing the school district's decision to test student athletes as "a choice that appears to have been driven more by a belief in what would pass constitutional muster ... than by a belief in what was required to meet the District's principal disciplinary concern.").

12002–2002
Freightliner Corp. v. Myrick green
scotus · 1995
11996–1996
Sherwood v. State green
ind · 1983
11992–1992
Brunner v. Hutchinson Division, Lear-Siegler, Inc. green
sdd · 1991
11992–1992
Maxwell v. State green
indctapp · 1983
11984–1984
Asbestos Insulating & Roofing Co. v. Schrock red
indctapp · 1943
11976–1976
White Swan Laundry v. Muzolf neutral
indctapp · 1942
11976–1976
American Security Co. v. Minard red
indctapp · 1948
11976–1976
National Malleable & Casting Co. v. Holliday neutral
indctapp · 1932
11976–1976
McCoy v. General Glass Corp. green
indctapp · 1938
11976–1976
Bohn Aluminum & Brass Co., Plant 9 v. Kinney green
indctapp · 1974
11976–1976
Robinson v. Twigg Industries, Inc. green
indctapp · 1972
11976–1976
City of Anderson v. Borton green
indctapp · 1961
11976–1976

Where else courts name it

NY 127 (1919–2026) CA 106 (1953–2025) TX 88 (1978–2026) IL 63 (1955–2025) OH 56 (1988–2026) NJ 49 (1960–2026) LA 49 (1956–2023) FL 45 (1973–2019) PA 43 (1951–2024) CT 37 (1973–2024) MI 30 (1970–2025) DC 29 (1978–2024) MA 29 (1895–2025) IN 23 (1976–2020) CO 22 (1980–2025) WA 22 (1944–2025) OR 22 (1985–2025) MO 21 (1982–2024) IA 20 (1960–2025) MD 19 (1988–2024) WI 18 (1975–2023) TN 17 (1978–2025) NM 16 (1980–2024) NC 15 (1982–2025) AZ 14 (1968–2024) KS 14 (1980–2026) DE 13 (1990–2025) ID 11 (1972–2021) GA 10 (1925–2026) VA 10 (1967–2026) WV 9 (1975–2017) SC 9 (2007–2019) AL 9 (1994–2016) NH 9 (1979–2018) AK 9 (1982–2025) MS 9 (1980–2017) ME 8 (1978–2025) RI 8 (1979–2010) KY 8 (1985–2026) MN 7 (1966–2024) UT 7 (1995–2022) HI 6 (2000–2020) WY 6 (1966–2006) VT 5 (1991–2018) OK 5 (1988–2023) AR 4 (1982–2020) NE 4 (1998–2022) NV 4 (2016–2017) MT 4 (1989–2015) ND 3 (1979–2000) SD 2 (2005–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check