Holland v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1DissentChezem, Judge
I respectfully dissent because Holland's petition for PCR should be barred by the doctrine of laches. "For laches to bar relief, the State must prove by a preponderance of the evidence, first, that the petitioner unreasonably delayed in seeking relief and, second, that the State has been prejudiced by the delay." Perry v. State (1987), Ind., 512 N.E.2d 841, 843, reh. denied. We should reverse the decision of the PCR court and remand to determine if the facts presented by the State were sufficient to infer under the circumstances that Holland had knowledge of a defect in his convictions or…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Perry v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1987
- Mottern v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
- Stewart v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1990
- Kindred v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1987
- Taylor v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.