Opinion ID: 853072
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Case Law Interpreting Article I, Section 20

Text: Despite the lack of debate concerning the enactment of Article I, Section 20, appellate courts of this State have examined this provision on numerous occasions. With very few exceptions, the courts have addressed it in the context of the meaning of shall remain inviolate. Since 1877, when the Indiana Supreme Court declared that shall remain inviolate means continue as it was at common law, Allen v. Anderson, 57 Ind. 388, 389, 1877 WL 6470 (1877), the courts have explained that the right to trial by jury is preserved only in those cases that were triable by jury at common law. See, e.g., State ex rel. Van Orden v. Floyd Cir. Ct., 274 Ind. 597, 412 N.E.2d 1216, 1218 (1980); Hayworth v. Bromwell, 239 Ind. 430, 158 N.E.2d 285, 287 (1959); Coca Cola Bottling Works v. Harvey, 209 Ind. 262, 198 N.E. 782, 782 (1935); Reynolds v. State, 698 N.E.2d 390, 394 (Ind.Ct.App.1998), trans. denied. Otherwise, this provision has not been the subject of much litigation.