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.
20 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Anglemyer v. Stategreen1 sentence2013See Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482, 490 (Ind. 2007), clarified on reh’g, 875 N.E.2d 218 . | 1 | 1 |
Anglemyer v. Stategreen1 sentence2013See Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482, 490 (Ind. 2007), clarified on reh’g, 875 N.E.2d 218 . | 1 | 1 |
Holden v. Stategreen1 sentence2007Jack is claiming a violation under the actual evidence test, and in a challenge under that test, “the appellant must demonstrate a reasonable possibility that the evidentiary facts used by the fact-finder to establish the essential elements of one offense may have also been used to establish the essential elements of a second challenged offense.” Holden v. State, 815 N.E.2d 1049, 1057 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Hurt v. Stategreen1 sentence2003In Hurt v. State, 553 N.E.2d 1243, 1249 (Ind.Ct.App.1990), this Court was faced with a challenge to an instruction virtually identical to the one at issue in this case. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Wright
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 893-894 . 2012Id. at 893-94 . | 4 | 2006–2014 |
Hoover v. State
green
2 sentences2012Id. 2012Id. | 2 | 2012–2012 |
City of Indianapolis v. Hicks ex rel. Richards
green
1 sentence2013Id. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Starzenski v. City of Elkhart
green
1 sentence2012Id. at 1137 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Cavens v. Zaberdac
green
1 sentence2012Id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Overstreet v. State
green
1 sentence2009Id. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Bushnell Corp. v. ITT Corp.
green
1 sentence2001The court held that where the challenge to the claim is substantive, "the motion more comports with the usual purpose of a motion under rule 12(c), and judgment in favor of defendant is appropriate if the challenge is successful." Id. at 1282 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Harding v. State
green
1 sentence1991Harding, supra, and cases cited therein. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Sandstrom v. Montana
green
2 sentences1989He takes the position that each of these instructions violates Sandstrom v. Montana (1979), 442 U.S. 510 , 99 S.Ct. 2450 , 61 L.Ed.2d 39 . 1989He takes the position that each of these instructions violates Sandstrom v. Montana (1979), 442 U.S. 510 , 99 S.Ct. 2450 , 61 L.Ed.2d 39 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Austin v. Thrapp
neutral
1 sentence1986Austin v. Thrapp (1983), Ind.App., 444 N.E.2d 867 . 6 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
E.S. v. Bartholomew County Department of Public Welfare
green
1 sentence1984In Matter of V.M.S., (1983) Ind.App., 446 N.E.2d 632 , this court, in affirming the constitutionality of IND.CODE 81-6-5-4 on a challenge as to the standard of evidence, stated the standard of review in constitutional challenges: "We should also remind the parents of our standard of reviewing questions as to the constitutionality of a statute: 'In approaching a consideration of the constitutionality of a statute, we must at all times exercise self restraint. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Degenias v. State
neutral
2 sentences1982In that case the Court of Appeals upheld a challenge to an instruction given in which the following sentence appeared: “ ‘In the exercise of self-defense the party assaulted ordinarily is required to act immediately, without time to deliberate and investigate.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Id., 386 N.E.2d at 1231 . 1982In that case the Court of Appeals upheld a challenge to an instruction given in which the following sentence appeared: “ ‘In the exercise of self-defense the party assaulted ordinarily is required to act immediately, without time to deliberate and investigate.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Id., 386 N.E.2d at 1231 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Cochnower v. Cochnower
neutral
1 sentence1976Lee v. Mozingo (1895), 143 Ind. 667 , 41 N.E. 454 ; Searle v. Whipperman (1881), 79 Ind. 424 ; Monroe v. Strader (1870), 33 Ind. 111 ; Cochnower v. Cochnower (1866), 27 Ind. 253 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Strader v. Manville
neutral
1 sentence1976Lee v. Mozingo (1895), 143 Ind. 667 , 41 N.E. 454 ; Searle v. Whipperman (1881), 79 Ind. 424 ; Monroe v. Strader (1870), 33 Ind. 111 ; Cochnower v. Cochnower (1866), 27 Ind. 253 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Searle v. Whipperman
neutral
1 sentence1976Lee v. Mozingo (1895), 143 Ind. 667 , 41 N.E. 454 ; Searle v. Whipperman (1881), 79 Ind. 424 ; Monroe v. Strader (1870), 33 Ind. 111 ; Cochnower v. Cochnower (1866), 27 Ind. 253 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Lee v. Mozingo
neutral
2 sentences1976Lee v. Mozingo (1895), 143 Ind. 667 , 41 N.E. 454 ; Searle v. Whipperman (1881), 79 Ind. 424 ; Monroe v. Strader (1870), 33 Ind. 111 ; Cochnower v. Cochnower (1866), 27 Ind. 253 . 1976Lee v. Mozingo (1895), 143 Ind. 667 , 41 N.E. 454 ; Searle v. Whipperman (1881), 79 Ind. 424 ; Monroe v. Strader (1870), 33 Ind. 111 ; Cochnower v. Cochnower (1866), 27 Ind. 253 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.