Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Indiana opinions name it 1 courts 1973–2020 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Lampkins v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See Lampkins, 682 N.E.2d at 1272 . | 1 | 1 |
Guy v. Stategreen1 sentence2013In Guy v. State, our supreme court held that the presence of a tongue stud placed in the defendant’s mouth more than twenty minutes before a breath test did not render the test inadmissible. 823 N.E.2d 274, 275 (Ind.2005). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Robert O. Hedrick v. Angela R. Gilbert
green
2 sentences2020In the Hedrick case, Hedrick argued that Gilbert’s motion for clarification was “tantamount to a motion to correct error.” Id. 2017In the Hedrick case, Hedrick argued that Gilbert’s motion for clarification was “tantamount to a motion to correct error.” Id. | 2 | 2017–2020 |
Harris v. State
green
2 sentences1979The necessity of a defendant’s presence at trial is governed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, by Article 1, section 13 of the Indiana Constitution, and by I.C. 35-1-28-1 (Burns Code Ed.1971), which provides: “Presence of accused — Offenses punishable by death or imprisonment. — No person prosecuted for any offense punishable by death, or by confinement in the state prison or county jail, shall be tried unless personally present during the trial.” 3 In Harris v. State (1967) 249 Ind. 681 , 231 N.E.2d 800 , the Indiana Supreme Court interpreted the mandate of I.C. 35-1-2 1979The necessity of a defendant’s presence at trial is governed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, by Article 1, section 13 of the Indiana Constitution, and by I.C. 35-1-28-1 (Burns Code Ed.1971), which provides: “Presence of accused — Offenses punishable by death or imprisonment. — No person prosecuted for any offense punishable by death, or by confinement in the state prison or county jail, shall be tried unless personally present during the trial.” 3 In Harris v. State (1967) 249 Ind. 681 , 231 N.E.2d 800 , the Indiana Supreme Court interpreted the mandate of I.C. 35-1-2 | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Parker v. State
neutral
1 sentence1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
McPhearson v. State
green
2 sentences1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. 1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Dillard v. State
green
1 sentence1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Lewis v. State
green
2 sentences1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. 1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Martin v. State
green
2 sentences1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. 1973Parker v. State (1970), [254] Ind. [593], 261 N.E.2d 562 ; McPhearson v. State (1970), 253 Ind. 254 , 253 N.E.2d 226 ; Lewis v. State (1969), 252 Ind. 454 , 250 N.E.2d 358 .’ Dillard v. State (1971), [257] Ind. [282], 274 N.E.2d 387, 389 .” Martin v. State (1972), 258 Ind. 83 , 279 N.E.2d 189, 190 , 29 Ind. Dec. 427 , 429, 430. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.