14 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1970–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cox v. Stategreen2 sentences2019A defendant facing revocation of either a community corrections placement or probation “is entitled to representation by counsel, written notice of the claimed violations, disclosure of the opposing evidence, an opportunity to be heard and present evidence, and the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses in a neutral hearing before the trial court.” Cox, 706 N.E.2d at 550 . 1. 2018Due process generally includes: “representation by counsel, written notice of the claimed violations, disclosure of the opposing evidence, an opportunity to be heard and present evidence, and the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses in a neutral hearing before the trial court.” Cox v. State, 706 N.E.2d 547, 550 (Ind. 1999). [23] A.S.’s Fourteenth Amendment claim is intertwined with his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. | 1 | 5 |
Million v. Stategreen2 sentences2017We held the hearing in Million amounted to' nothing more than judicial review of the administrative hearing and deprived Million of due process as “he did not receive a neutral hearing before the trial court.” Id. at 1003 . 2000However, a hearing is required before the revocation of placement in the community corrections program and before his placement is revoked, "[a] defendant in community corrections is entitled to written notice of the claimed violation of the terms of his placement, disclosure of the evidence against him, an opportunity to be heard and present evidence and the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses in a neutral hearing before the trial court." Million [v. State, 646 N.E.2d 998, 1008 (Ind.Ct.App. 1995) ]. | 1 | 3 |
Davis v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Davis v. State, 669 N.E.2d 1005, 1008 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Martinez Chavez v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Non-English- speaking defendants have “the right to have [their] proceeding simultaneously translated to allow for effective participation.” Martinez Chavez v. State, 534 N.E.2d 731, 736 (Ind. 1989) (citing United States ex rel. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2018In Strickland, the United States Supreme Court stated, “The Constitution guarantees a fair trial through the Due Process Clauses, but it defines the basic elements of a fair trial largely through the several provisions of the Sixth Amendment, including the Counsel Clause . . . .” 466 U.S. at 684 - 85, 104 S. Ct. at 2063 . 2018In Strickland, the United States Supreme Court stated, “The Constitution guarantees a fair trial through the Due Process Clauses, but it defines the basic elements of a fair trial largely through the several provisions of the Sixth Amendment, including the Counsel Clause . . . .” 466 U.S. at 684 - 85, 104 S. Ct. at 2063 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Beam v. Wausau Insurance Co.
green
1 sentence2006Id. at 531 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Rynerson v. City of Franklin
green
1 sentence1996In support of its contention, Baseball cites Rynerson v. City of Franklin, 655 N.E.2d 126 (Ind.Ct.App.1995), without analysis. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Isaac v. State
green
1 sentence1995CJ Isaac, 605 N.E.2d at 148 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Morrissey v. Brewer
green
2 sentences1982Hawkins v. Jenkins (1978), Ind., 374 N.E.2d 496 , 500 and Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2595 ; 33 L.Ed.2d 484 . 1982Hawkins v. Jenkins (1978), Ind., 374 N.E.2d 496 , 500 and Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2595 ; 33 L.Ed.2d 484 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Hawkins v. Jenkins
green
1 sentence1982Hawkins v. Jenkins (1978), Ind., 374 N.E.2d 496 , 500 and Morrissey v. Brewer (1972), 408 U.S. 471 , 92 S.Ct. 2593, 2595 ; 33 L.Ed.2d 484 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Presbytery of Indpls. v. First United Presbyterian Church
neutral
2 sentences1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N. E. 2d 479 , 240 N. E. 2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N. E. 2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordi 1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N. E. 2d 479 , 240 N. E. 2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N. E. 2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordi | 1 | 1970–1970 |
The Ind. Annual Conf. Corp. v. Lemon, Etc.
neutral
2 sentences1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N. E. 2d 479 , 240 N. E. 2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N. E. 2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordi 1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N. E. 2d 479 , 240 N. E. 2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N. E. 2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordi | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church
neutral
2 sentences1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N. E. 2d 479 , 240 N. E. 2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N. E. 2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordi 1970If my understanding of this dispute (including the trial evidence and the rules of the denomination) is correct, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded with *324 directions to the trial judge to find all the facts pertinent to the resolution of that dispute, to restate his conclusions of law consistent with the views expressed in Presbytery of Indianapolis v. First United Presbyterian Church (1968), 143 Ind. App. 72 , 238 N.E.2d 479 , 240 N.E.2d 77 , and Ind. Annual Conference v. Lemon (1956), 235 Ind. 163 , 131 N.E.2d 780 (majority opinion only) and to render judgment accordin | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.