Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Greer v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 15, 1996No. 57A03-9510-CR-333Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSullivan, Judge

With respect to Issue I, I agree that the State has waived the issue of a belated prac-cipe. I note, however, that the conclusion that failure to file a timely praecipe is a "waivable" defect implies that such failure does not render the appeal defective for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, since lack of subject matter jurisdiction is an issue which can be raised at any time, including for the first time on appeal. See In re Adoption of H.S. (1985) Ind.App., 483 N.E.2d 777, 780. Further, if such failure to file a timely prac-cipe resulted in our not obtaining subject matter jurisdiction,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Soft Water Utilities, Inc. v. Le FevreIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Lugar v. State Ex Rel. LeeIndiana Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Claywell v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Employment & Training ServicesIndiana Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Matter of Adoption of HSIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Howard v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1995

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API