Skip to main content

Smith v. State

Citations

  • 779 N.E.2d 111
  • 2002 Ind. App. LEXIS 1964
  • 2002 WL 31667860

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the trial court did not err by restricting the defendant/child molester's gaccess to computers and online computer services
  • holding that the trial court did not err by restricting the defendant/child molester’s access to computers and online computer services
  • stating that “our statute defining sexual intercourse does not require that the vagina be penetrated”
  • restricting sexual offender’s exposure to sexually-explicit material while on supervisory release protects children from possible endangerment and would likely aid supervisory releasee's rehabilitation
  • holding condition banning \pornographic or sexually explicit materials\ unconstitutionally vague
  • noting facts can be “explained in simple or childlike language which the judge and jury can understand”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Najam, Sharpnack, Friedlander

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

42 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.