Skip to main content

Flanders v. State

Citations

  • 955 N.E.2d 732
  • 2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 1734
  • 2011 WL 4349371

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • determining that application of SVP reporting requirements to Flanders was an ex post facto punishment because, among other reasons, Flanders was not provided with an opportunity to contest application of the requirements
  • proceeding with review despite deficient findings, noting “[n]either party argue[d] that remand for factual findings [was] necessary”
  • according “special weight” to the seventh factor of whether a sanction appears excessive in relation to the alternative purpose assigned to it

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Crone, Bailey, Mathias

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.