failure to assign error (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

failure to assign error in Indiana

7 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2008 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 (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Woodson v. Stategreen
indctapp · 2002 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
1 sentence

2003Woodson v. State, 778 N.E.2d 475, 478 (Ind.Ct.App.2002).

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 (3)

CaseCitedYears
Snider v. State green
ind · 1984
2 sentences

2008In clarification of the dicta in Snider, supra, any issue set forth in a post-conviction petition must be raised within the purview of the post-conviction rules, e.g., deprivation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, or be an issue demonstrably unavailable to the petitioner at the time of his trial and direct appeal.

2002In clarification of the dicta in Snider, supra, any issue set forth in a post-conviction petition must be raised within the purview of the post-conviction rules, e.g., deprivation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, or be an issue demonstrably unavailable to the petitioner at the time of his trial and direct appeal.

31985–2008
Bailey v. State green
ind · 1985
2 sentences

1990In Bailey v. State (1985) Ind., 472 N.E.2d 1260, 1263 , the following pronouncement was made: "A claim characterized solely as fundamental error is available only on appeal and is raised when there has been a failure to assign an error which is so egregious that it must be decided by the appellate court because of its fundamental nature.... [Alny issue set forth in a post-conviction petition must be raised within the purview of the post-conviction rules, e.g., deprivation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, or be an issue demonstrably unavailable to the petitioner

1990In Bailey v. State (1985) Ind., 472 N.E.2d 1260, 1263 , the following pronouncement was made: "A claim characterized solely as fundamental error is available only on appeal and is raised when there has been a failure to assign an error which is so egregious that it must be decided by the appellate court because of its fundamental nature... . [A]ny issue set forth in a post-conviction petition must be raised within the purview of the post-conviction rules, e.g., deprivation of the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, or be an issue demonstrably unavailable to the petitioner

21990–1990
Beasley v. State green
ind · 1983
1 sentence

1983Beasley, 445 N.E.2d at 1375 .

11983–1983

Where else courts name it

WA 46 (1955–2026) IN 7 (1983–2008) TX 7 (1969–2007) OR 7 (1999–2014) NC 3 (2002–2009) GA 3 (1933–1937) OH 2 (2007–2016) FL 2 (1966–1970)

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