undisputed claim in Indiana

2019However, “[b]ias and prejudice violate a defendant’s due process right to a fair trial only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id. [35] The conduct and strategy of the parties is left to them and the ultimate decision is to be left to the jury.

2017“Bias and prejudice violate a defendant’s due process right to a fair trial only where there is an undisputed claim or where Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 29A02-1701-CR-98 | October 6, 2017 Page 5 of 11 the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Everling v. State, 929 N.E.2d 1281, 1288 (Ind. 2010). [9] In Hartwell v. State, defense counsel misstated the evidence during closing argument by claiming a trailer had been in use during the theft of items from a mobile home.

2023In addition, “[a] showing of prejudice sufficient to support a motion for a change of judge must be established from personal, individual attacks on a defendant’s character, or otherwise.” Miller v. State, 106 N.E.3d 1067, 1076 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018), trans. denied.

2023In addition, “[a] showing of prejudice sufficient to support a motion for a change of judge must be established from personal, individual attacks on a defendant’s character, or otherwise.” Miller v. State, 106 N.E.3d 1067, 1076 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018), trans. denied.

2020A defendant makes this showing “only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id.

2019A defendant makes this showing “only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id.

2010Smith, 770 N.E.2d at 823 (citing Resnover v. State, 507 N.E.2d 1382, 1391 (Ind.1987)).

2002Resnover v. State, 507 N.E.2d 1382, 1391 (Ind.1987); Harvey, 751 N.E.2d at 259 ; Cook, 612 N.E.2d at 1088 .

2017“Such bias and prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id. “‘To assess whether the judge has crossed the barrier into impartiality, we examine both the judge’s actions and demeanor.’” Perry v. State, 904 N.E.2d 302, 307-08 (Ind. Ct. App. 2090) (quoting Timberlake v. State, 690 N.E.2d 243, 256 (Ind. 1997)).

2012“Such bias and prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id. “‘To assess whether the judge has crossed the barrier into impartiality, we examine both the judge’s actions and demeanor.’” Perry v. State, 904 N.E.2d 302, 307-08 (Ind. Ct. App. 2090) (quoting Timberlake v. State, 690 N.E.2d 243, 256 (Ind. 1997)).

2017“Such bias and prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id. “‘To assess whether the judge has crossed the barrier into impartiality, we examine both the judge’s actions and demeanor.’” Perry v. State, 904 N.E.2d 302, 307-08 (Ind. Ct. App. 2090) (quoting Timberlake v. State, 690 N.E.2d 243, 256 (Ind. 1997)).

2012“Such bias and prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.” Id. “‘To assess whether the judge has crossed the barrier into impartiality, we examine both the judge’s actions and demeanor.’” Perry v. State, 904 N.E.2d 302, 307-08 (Ind. Ct. App. 2090) (quoting Timberlake v. State, 690 N.E.2d 243, 256 (Ind. 1997)).

1989Accord Lasley v. State (1987), Ind., 510 N.E.2d 1340 .

1989Accord Lasley v. State (1987), Ind., 510 N.E.2d 1340 .” Hickman understandably interprets Wilson v. State, supra, 472 N.E.2d 932 , to require an evidentiary hearing in every case in which a Motion for Change of Venue or Change of Judge is properly before the court.

1989“Such clear bias or prejudice only exists where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge has expressed an opinion on the merits of the controversy before him.” Wallace v. State (1985), Ind., 486 N.E.2d 445, 456 , cert. denied, (1986), 478 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 3311 , 92 L.Ed.2d 723 .

1989To show abuse of discretion, the defendant in the present case tries to establish prejudice on the trial judge’s part. ‘Such clear bias or prejudice only exists where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge has expressed an opinion on the merits of the controversy before him.’ Wallace v. State (1985), Ind., 486 N.E.2d 445, 456 , cert. denied, (1986), 478 U.S. 1010 , 106 S.Ct. 3311 , 92 L.Ed.2d 723 .

2019“Such bias or prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge has expressed an opinion on the merits of the pending controversy.” Id.

2014Such bias or prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge has expressed an opinion on the merits of the pending controversy.” Cook v. State, 612 N.E.2d 1085, 1088 (Ind.Ct.App.1993).

2020“Such bias or prejudice exists only where there is an undisputed claim or the judge has expressed an opinion on the merits of the controversy before him [or her].” Id. “[P]rejudice must be shown by the judge’s trial conduct; it cannot be inferred from his [or her] subjective views.” Richardson v. Richardson, 34 N.E.3d 696, 703 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).

2019“The mere assertion that certain adverse rulings by a judge constitute bias and prejudice does not establish the requisite showing.” Voss v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1211, 1217 (Ind. 2006). [27] Hagan identifies several ways the trial court judge allegedly displayed partiality, claiming this is a non-exhaustive list.10 We address these contentions in turn.

2018Smith, 770 N.E.2d at 823 . [10] Our courts have long held that “[w]here a defendant fails to object or otherwise challenge a trial judge’s remarks, any alleged error is waived on appeal.” Garrett v. State, 737 N.E.2d 388, 391 (Ind. 2000).

2013See Vaughn, 971 N.E.2d at 68-71 . 9 2010) (“Bias and prejudice violate a defendant’s due process right to a fair trial only where there is an undisputed claim or where the judge expressed an opinion of the controversy over which the judge was presiding.”).

2000Smith v. State, 535 N.E.2d 1155, 1157 (Ind.1989).

1989Accord Lasley v. State (1987), Ind., 510 N.E.2d 1340 ." Hickman understandably interprets Wilson v. State, supra, 472 N.E.2d 932 , to require an evidentiary hearing in every case in which a Motion for Change of Venue or Change of Judge is properly before the court.

1989Accord Lasley v. State (1987), Ind., 510 N.E.2d 1340 .” Hickman understandably interprets Wilson v. State, supra, 472 N.E.2d 932 , to require an evidentiary hearing in every case in which a Motion for Change of Venue or Change of Judge is properly before the court.