Published by the Indiana Office of Court Services
That officers knew defendant wanted to leave town was an exigent circumstance justifying defendant’s warrantless arrest.
A nonclaim statute may be tolled in cases of fraudulent concealment.
Statements to a witness in a pending action to “bow out” to not “lose anything in the end” is sufficient to sustain a conviction for attempted obstruction of justice.
A second or subsequent pat down search must by supported by specific and articulable facts that the suspect is armed and dangerous or incident to arrest.
Where defendant filed a motion for indigent counsel but failed to appear at a hearing to consider that motion, trial court improperly denied his motion and required that he proceed pro se without giving sufficient warning about the perils of self-representation, and by not inquiring as to his indigency.
251 N. Illinois Street, Suite 800
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204
Case Clips are selected decisions of the Indiana appellate courts abstracted for judges by the Indiana Office of Court Services. The full text of Indiana opinions may be retrieved from the Indiana Judicial System website at courts.IN.gov/opinions.
The Indiana Office of Court Services is the staff agency for the Judicial Conference of Indiana and serves Indiana judges and court personnel by providing educational programs, publications, and research assistance.
All content © 2020 Indiana Judicial Center courts.IN.gov