Felix C. Sickels v. State of Indiana
Indiana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
RUSH, Justice.
In this case, the trial court determined that the custodial parent was the “victim” for purposes of criminal restitution for the noncustodial parent’s failure to support his dependent children. At the time the trial court ordered restitution, the children were adults and emancipated.
On direct appeal, the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, held that it was “erroneous” for the trial court to order the noncustodial parent to make restitution to the custodial parent. Specifically, the Court of Appeals held that the custodial parent was not a “victim” of the noncustodial parent’s crimes…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Wright v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
- Roach v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1998
- Reinbold v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1990
- Haltom v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2005
- Smith v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Michael D. Perkinson, Jr. v. Kay Char PerkinsonIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
- Courtney L. Schwartz v. Jodi S. HeeterIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
- Ruben Gonzalez v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals · 2014
- Antonio L. Ware v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2016
- Darick L. Loving v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals · 2018
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.