10 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Prewitt v. Stategreen2 sentences2019In other words, he contends that the trial court should have imposed the five-year sentence agreed by the parties because he admitted to the violations. [13] It is well established that probation is a matter of grace left to trial court discretion, not a right to which a criminal defendant is entitled. 3 Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind. 2007). 2018Kendrick now appeals. [8] “Probation is a matter of grace left to trial court discretion, not a right to which a criminal defendant is entitled.” Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind. 2007). | 2 | 2 |
Justin D. Maurer v. Crystal Cobb-Maurergreen1 sentence2020Indiana law defines “stalking” as “‘a knowing or an intentional course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another person that would cause a reasonable person to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, or threatened.’” Maurer v. Cobb-Maurer, 994 N.E.2d 753, 757 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (quoting Ind. Code § 35-45-10-1 ) (emphasis added). [9] Here, the trial court did not issue its own specific findings based on the evidence presented during the contested hearing. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dixon v. State
green
2 sentences1996The trial court's error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Kelly v. State, 535 N.E.2d 140 (Ind.1989), and distinguishable from Dixon, 425 N.E.2d 673 . 1996The trial court’s error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Kelly v. State, 535 N.E.2d 140 (Ind.1989), and distinguishable from Dixon, 425 N.E.2d 673 . | 2 | 1989–1996 |
In re Wyser
green
1 sentence2024In Matter of Brown, after a contested hearing, we removed the judge from office for her “mismanagement, delays, and dereliction of judicial duties on cases; … failure to complete necessary paperwork and adequately train or supervise court staff, which resulted in delayed releases of defendants from jail; and failure to cooperate with members of the Marion Superior Court’s Executive Committee to address the underlying issues that led to the delayed releases.” 4 N.E.3d 619 , 621 (Ind. 2014). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
In re the Adoption of E.B.F., J.W. v. D.F.
green
1 sentence2020In E.B.F., 93 N.E.3d at 766 , the father and stepmother refused to return the mother’s repeated phone calls to arrange visitation with the child. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
E.W. v. J.W.
green
1 sentence2020In E.W., 20 N.E.3d at 896-97 , the father prohibited communication between the mother and child for over a year until the date of the contested hearing. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Hendrickson v. Binkley
green
2 sentences2002In his appeal, the father contends that the trial court abused its discretion and that the evidence does not establish any of the factors required in Hendrickson v. Binkley, 161 Ind.App. 388 , 316 N.E.2d 376 (1974). 2002In his appeal, the father contends that the trial court abused its discretion and that the evidence does not establish any of the factors required in Hendrickson v. Binkley, 161 Ind.App. 388 , 316 N.E.2d 376 (1974). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Pierce v. State
green
1 sentence2001The Indiana Supreme Court elaborated on this standard when it decided Pierce v. State, 677 N.E.2d 39 (Ind.1997). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
KBI, Inc. v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development
green
1 sentence1997In KBI, Inc. v. Review Bd. (1995) Ind.App., 656 N.E.2d 842 , we held that when the provisions of a contested rule are disputed, the rule must be reduced to writing and introduced into evidence. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Kelly v. State
green
2 sentences1996The trial court's error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Kelly v. State, 535 N.E.2d 140 (Ind.1989), and distinguishable from Dixon, 425 N.E.2d 673 . 1996The trial court’s error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Kelly v. State, 535 N.E.2d 140 (Ind.1989), and distinguishable from Dixon, 425 N.E.2d 673 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Shelton v. State
green
2 sentences1989The trial court's error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Shelton v. State (1936), 209 Ind. 534 , 199 N.E. 148 , and distinguishable from Dizon v. State (1981), Ind.App., 425 N.E.2d 673 . 1989The trial court's error in giving the contested instruction to the jury makes this case analogous to Shelton v. State (1936), 209 Ind. 534 , 199 N.E. 148 , and distinguishable from Dizon v. State (1981), Ind.App., 425 N.E.2d 673 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.