12 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wooley v. Stategreen2 sentences2013In other words, if a defendant “seeks or acquiesces in any delay that results in a later trial date, the time limitations of the rule are also extended by the length of those delays.” Wooley v. State, 716 N.E.2d 919, 924 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). 2006Furthermore, if a defendant "seeks or acquiesces in any delay which results in a later trial date, the time limitations of the rule are also extended by the length of those delays." Wooley v. State, 716 N.E.2d 919, 924 (Ind.1999). | 5 | 5 |
Isaacs v. Stategreen2 sentences2012“If a defendant misdemeanor. 7 seeks or acquiesces in any delay which results in a later trial date, the time limitations of the rule are also extended by the length of those delays.” Isaacs v. State, 673 N.E.2d 757, 762 (Ind. 1996). 2001The State cites Wooley v. State, 716 N.E.2d 919, 924 (Ind.1999), which stated that when a defendant "seeks or acquiesces in any delay which results in a later trial date, the time limitations of the rule are also extended by the length of those delays." Wooley cited Isaacs v. State, 673 N.E.2d 757, 762 (Ind.1996). | 5 | 5 |
Ferguson v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See also Ferguson v. State, 594 N.E.2d 790 (Ind. 1992). 1998See Ferguson v. State, 594 N.E.2d 790, 792 (Ind.1992). | 2 | 2 |
Hill v. Stategreen1 sentence2014“Where a defendant seeks or acquiesces in any delay which results in a later trial date, the time limitations of the rule are also extended by the length of those delays.” Hill v. State, 777 N.E.2d 795, 798 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (quotation marks and citation omitted), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Wheeler v. Stategreen1 sentence2001Whether a particular delay in bringing a defendant to trial violates the speedy trial guarantee is a determination that "largely depends on the specific cireumstances of the case." Wheeler v. State, 662 N.E.2d 192, 193 (Ind.Ct.App.1996). | 1 | 1 |
Burdine v. Stategreen1 sentence1996Burdine v. State, 515 N.E.2d 1085, 1090 (Ind.1987), reh’g 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 |
|---|---|---|
Battle v. State
green
1 sentence1981Battle v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 39 ; Bradberry v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 530 , 364 N.E.2d 1183 ; Gross v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 46 , 278 N.E.2d 583 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Bradberry v. State
green
2 sentences1981Battle v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 39 ; Bradberry v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 530 , 364 N.E.2d 1183 ; Gross v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 46 , 278 N.E.2d 583 . 1981Battle v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 39 ; Bradberry v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 530 , 364 N.E.2d 1183 ; Gross v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 46 , 278 N.E.2d 583 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Gross v. State
green
2 sentences1981Battle v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 39 ; Bradberry v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 530 , 364 N.E.2d 1183 ; Gross v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 46 , 278 N.E.2d 583 . 1981Battle v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 39 ; Bradberry v. State, (1977) 266 Ind. 530 , 364 N.E.2d 1183 ; Gross v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 46 , 278 N.E.2d 583 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.