Legal Opinion · Dissent

Martin v. State

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 25, 2019No. Court of Appeals Case No. 29A04-1712-CR-2992Published

1DissentRush, Chief Justice

Are additional procedural safeguards necessary to ensure that indigent Hoosiers aren't incarcerated for probation violations that result simply from their poverty? Yes-and it's imperative that this Court explicitly establish those protections. Today, however, this Court declines to do so, and I thus respectfully dissent from the denial of transfer.

"[T]o prevent indigent defendants from being imprisoned because of their inability to pay," Garrett v. State , 680 N.E.2d 1, 2 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997), the Indiana General Assembly enacted a statute mandating that "[p]robation may not be revoked for…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Bearden v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Black v. RomanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Whedon v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Runyon v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Cynthia Bell v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2016

5 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