825 N.E.2d
North Eastern Reporter 2d (1978-2014) volume 825. View scanned PDF. View API.
- Burgess v. E.L.C. Electric, Inc., 825 N.E.2d 1 (2005)
- E.L.C. Electric, Inc. v. Indiana Department of Labor, 825 N.E.2d 16 (2005)
- Wheatcraft v. Wheatcraft, 825 N.E.2d 23 (2005)
- Williamson v. Williamson, 825 N.E.2d 33 (2005)
- Wilson v. State, 825 N.E.2d 49 (2005)
- In re Blumenthal, 825 N.E.2d 374 (2005)
- In re Batesky, 825 N.E.2d 375 (2005)
- Haville v. Haville, 825 N.E.2d 375 (2005)
- Bodem v. Bancroft, 825 N.E.2d 380 (2005)
- Abran v. State, 825 N.E.2d 384 (2005)
- Midwest Minerals, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 825 N.E.2d 394 (2005)
- Coleman v. Vukovich, 825 N.E.2d 397 (2005)
- Reed v. Hoosier Health Systems, Inc., 825 N.E.2d 408 (2005)
- Davidson v. State, 825 N.E.2d 414 (2005)
- Kelley v. State, 825 N.E.2d 420 (2005)
- Hill v. State, 825 N.E.2d 432 (2005)
- Kendall v. State, 825 N.E.2d 439 (2005)
- Galligan v. Indiana Department of State Revenue, 825 N.E.2d 467 (2005)
- Wal Mart Stores, Inc. v. Wayne Township Assessor, 825 N.E.2d 485 (2005)
- Smith v. State, 825 N.E.2d 783, Defendant Maurice K. Smith's sentence in this case was increased by 10 years because the trial court found him to be a "repeat sexual offender." He contends that the Indiana and United States Constitutions require a jury determination of repeat sexual offender status before such an enhancement may be imposed. We affirm the trial court's decision. Smith's rights under Article I, Section 19, of the Indiana Constitution are not implicated because the Legislature has not committed the determination of repeat sexual offender status to the jury. And the federal constitutional rule that "any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury" does not apply to "the fact of a prior conviction." The only facts at issue in determining repeat sexual offender status are a defendant's prior convictions. (2005)
- In re Jarrett, 825 N.E.2d 790 (2005)
- Hatten v. Hatten, 825 N.E.2d 791 (2005)
- Inkenhaus v. Vanderburgh County Office of Family & Children, 825 N.E.2d 798 (2005)
- Walton v. Claybridge Homeowners Assn., Inc., 825 N.E.2d 818 (2005)
- Nance v. Miami Sand & Gravel, LLC, 825 N.E.2d 826 (2005)
- Fields v. State, 825 N.E.2d 841 (2005)
- Kelly v. Levandoski, 825 N.E.2d 850 (2005)
- Cheever-Ortiz v. State, 825 N.E.2d 867 (2005)
- Gantt v. State, 825 N.E.2d 874 (2005)
- Schrenger v. Indiana, 825 N.E.2d 879 (2005)
- Miller v. State, 825 N.E.2d 884 (2005)
- Ross v. Olson, 825 N.E.2d 890 (2005)
- Weis v. State, 825 N.E.2d 896 (2005)
- Gard v. Gard, 825 N.E.2d 907 (2005)
- Reed v. State, 825 N.E.2d 911 (2005)
- Paschall v. State, 825 N.E.2d 923 (2005)
- Jones v. State, 825 N.E.2d 926 (2005)
- State v. Casada, 825 N.E.2d 936 (2005)
- Everage v. Northern Indiana Public Service Co., 825 N.E.2d 941 (2005)
- Sanders v. State, 825 N.E.2d 952 (2005)
- Johnston v. Johnston, 825 N.E.2d 958 (2005)
- Ankney v. State, 825 N.E.2d 965 (2005)
- Brown v. State, 825 N.E.2d 978 (2005)
- Henderson v. State, 825 N.E.2d 983 (2005)
- Lambert v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1261 (2005)
- Dixon v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1269 (2005)
- Huffman v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1274 (2005)
- Rhone v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1277 (2005)
- Eaton v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1287 (2005)