Griffith v. State, No. 48A02-1310-CR-909, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 30, 2014).

Trial court properly excluded testimony from two witnesses about prior inconsistent statements made by a witness who had testified earlier.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Remy v. State, No. 48A02-1310-CR-857, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Sep. 30, 2014).

Prejudicial impact outweighed probative value of pornographic materials found in defendant’s home admitted on “grooming” rationale.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Robinson v. State, No. 49A05-1405-CR-224, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 1, 2014).

Trial court is to determine whether defendant should receive educational credit time earned while serving a sentence of home detention.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Campbell v. State, No. 89A04-1312-CR-634, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Oct. 2, 2014).

When defendant violated terms of plea agreement by refusing to testify against co-defendants, the State was properly permitted to withdraw from the agreement despite its having been accepted by the trial court.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion

Zavodnik v. Harper, No. 49A04-1307-PL-316, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Sept. 30, 2014).

Litigants do not have a license to abuse the litigation process. Pro se litigants must play by the rules. Litigants do not have an unfettered right to proceed in forma pauperis. Courts may place reasonable limits on filings by abusive litigants. Judges should not disqualify themselves because of a baseless demand.

Read Case Clip or Read Full Opinion