acceptable standard (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

acceptable standard in Indiana

10 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2020 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
RH v. Stategreen
indctapp · 2010 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2019–2020
2 sentences

2020R.H. v. State, 937 N.E.2d 386, 388 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). [18] P.K. was offered the opportunity to conform his behavior to an acceptable standard and his behavior over the course of probation – despite being offered services including cognitive behavioral therapy, dialectical behavioral therapy, and motivational interviewing – demonstrated that he was unable to progress in reforming or maintain progress for even a relatively short period of time.

2019R.H. v. State, 937 N.E.2d 386, 388 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). [11] J.J. was offered the opportunity to conform his behavior to an acceptable standard while on probation and was unable to do so for even a relatively short period of time.

22
Coleman v. Stategreen
ind · 1998 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Allegations that counsel “failed to investigate issues and interview witnesses do not amount to ineffective assistance absent a showing of what additional information may have been garnered from further consultation or investigation and how that additional information would have aided in the preparation of the case.” Coleman v. State, 694 N.E.2d 269, 274 (Ind. 1998) (citing Brown v. State, 691 N.E.2d 438 , 446–47 (Ind. 1998)). [28] Carr asserts that his collective counsel should have interviewed French in order to obtain her post-conviction testimony that Carr did not believe the gun was in wo

11
Nordstrom v. Stategreen
indctapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
1 sentence

2012See Nordstrom v. State, 627 N.E.2d 1380, 1383 (Ind.Ct.App.1994) (determining that even if Nordstrom genuinely believed that his gun would not fire without a clip inserted, it was inherently reckless for him to point the gun at his wife and pull the trigger under any circumstances, so his belief did not negate the culpability for reckless homicide), trans. denied.

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 (7)

CaseCitedYears
Pesch v. Gretter neutral
ind · 1940
2 sentences

1968See also: Pesch v. Gretter et al (1940), 216 Ind. 396 , 24 N. E. 2d 923 .

1968See also: Pesch v. Gretter et al (1940), 216 Ind. 396 , 24 N. E. 2d 923 .

21968–1968
Berry v. State Bank of Otterbein green
indctapp · 1935
2 sentences

1968The acceptable standard for consideration of a motion for finding appears to be similar to that of a motion for directed verdict: “. . . such a motion (for finding and judgment) is in purpose similar to a motion for a directed verdict in a case of trial by jury.” Berry v. State Bank of Otterbein (1935), 99 Ind. App. 655 , 193 N. E. 922 .

1968The acceptable standard for consideration of a motion for finding appears to be similar to that of a motion for directed verdict: “. . . such a motion (for finding and judgment) is in purpose similar to a motion for a directed verdict in a case of trial by jury.” Berry v. State Bank of Otterbein (1935), 99 Ind. App. 655 , 193 N. E. 922 .

21968–1968
Brown v. State green
ind · 1998
1 sentence

2020Allegations that counsel “failed to investigate issues and interview witnesses do not amount to ineffective assistance absent a showing of what additional information may have been garnered from further consultation or investigation and how that additional information would have aided in the preparation of the case.” Coleman v. State, 694 N.E.2d 269, 274 (Ind. 1998) (citing Brown v. State, 691 N.E.2d 438 , 446–47 (Ind. 1998)). [28] Carr asserts that his collective counsel should have interviewed French in order to obtain her post-conviction testimony that Carr did not believe the gun was in wo

12020–2020
KS v. State green
ind · 2006
1 sentence

2018K.S. , 849 N.E.2d at 544 . [19] K.S. was offered the opportunity to conform his behavior to an acceptable standard while on probation and was unable to do so for even the shortest period of time.

12018–2018
Kopec v. Memorial Hospital of South Bend, Inc. green
indctapp · 1990
2 sentences

1991Initially, we note that the circumstances here are different from those in Kopec v. Memorial Hosp. (1990) Ind.App., 557 N.E.2d 1367 since here the qualifications of Dr. Schroeder were challenged at the summary judgment.

1991Initially, we note that the circumstances here are different from those in Kopec v. Memorial Hosp. (1990) Ind. App., 557 N.E.2d 1367 since here the qualifications of Dr. Schroeder were challenged at the summary judgment.

11991–1991
Pirtle v. State green
ind · 1975
2 sentences

1986In dealing with the issue of relevance in Pirtle v. State (1975), 263 Ind. 16 , 323 N.E.2d 634, 643 , we quoted authority on the subject. "[The most acceptable test of relevance is the question, does the evidence offered render the desired inference more probable than it would be without the evidence?

1986In dealing with the issue of relevance in Pirtle v. State (1975), 263 Ind. 16 , 323 N.E.2d 634, 643 , we quoted authority on the subject. "[The most acceptable test of relevance is the question, does the evidence offered render the desired inference more probable than it would be without the evidence?

11986–1986
Campbell v. City of Mishawaka green
indctapp · 1981
2 sentences

1984Campbell v. City of Mishawaka (1981), Ind.App., 422 N.E.2d 334 .

1984Campbell v. City of Mishawaka (1981), Ind. App., 422 N.E.2d 334 .

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 31-37-18-6 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 34 (1959–2024) GA 33 (1985–2023) OH 23 (1973–2022) MS 18 (1995–2025) NY 18 (1962–2022) IL 17 (1928–2006) AK 15 (1980–1998) TX 14 (1968–2015) PA 14 (1978–2024) NJ 13 (1980–2024) LA 11 (1962–2021) MO 11 (1913–2022) TN 10 (1997–2022) IN 10 (1968–2020) AL 10 (1974–2015) WI 9 (1945–2022) MI 8 (1965–2015) FL 8 (1979–2026) WA 5 (1988–2017) HI 5 (2001–2020) IA 4 (1973–2022) CO 4 (1983–2019) NE 4 (1986–2018) VT 4 (2008–2015) MD 4 (1991–2017) VA 4 (1999–2019) MN 3 (1991–2005) MT 3 (1980–2011) ME 3 (1992–2002) NV 3 (1978–2015) NM 3 (2010–2014) AZ 3 (1971–2005) DE 3 (2015–2021) MA 2 (1978–2010) SC 2 (2005–2011) OK 2 (2017–2017) KS 2 (2008–2026) OR 2 (1957–2013) NC 2 (1996–2025)

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