ILNews

2 Supreme Court arguments Thursday

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court will hear two arguments Thursday, including a death penalty appeal by a man whose appeal has already once been denied by the justices.

At 9 a.m., the high court will hear arguments in Tommy R. Pruitt v. State of Indiana, No. 15S00-0512-PD-617, in which Tommy Pruitt was convicted of murder and other charges in Dearborn Circuit Court for killing Morgan County Deputy Sheriff Daniel Starnes. The Dearborn Circuit Court denied his petition for post-conviction relief. Pruitt appealed the denial, arguing he is mentally retarded and had ineffective assistance of his counsel, so he should not be sentenced to death.

Pruitt previously appealed his sentence, in which the majority of Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence in September 2005. Justice Robert Rucker dissented, believing Pruitt met his burden to prove he is mentally retarded and recommended his sentence be revised to a term of years.

In State of Indiana v. Adam L. Manuwal, No. 50S05-0805-CR-269, charges of operating a vehicle while intoxicated under Indiana Code Sections 9-30-5-1 and 2 - operating a vehicle while intoxicated - were dismissed against Adam Manuwal by the Marshall Superior Court. Manuwal was arrested and charged after driving an all-terrain vehicle on private property. The Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal after concluding he was improperly charged under the operating while intoxicated statutes and the state could have filed charges pursuant to I.C. Section 14-16-1-23 - operation of an off-road vehicle while under the influence of an alcoholic beverage.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

  2. Finally, an official that realizes that reducing the risks involved in the indulgence in illicit drug use is a great way to INCREASE the problem. What's next for these idiot 'proponents' of needle exchange programs? Give drunk drivers booze? Give grossly obese people coupons for free junk food?

  3. That comment on this e-site, which reports on every building, courtroom or even insignificant social movement by beltway sycophants as being named to honor the yet-quite-alive former chief judge, is truly laughable!

  4. Is this a social parallel to the Mosby prosecutions in Baltimore? Progressive ideology ever seeks Pilgrims to burn at the stake. (I should know.)

  5. The Conour embarrassment is an example of why it would be a good idea to NOT name public buildings or to erect monuments to "worthy" people until AFTER they have been dead three years, at least. And we also need to stop naming federal buildings and roads after a worthless politician whose only achievement was getting elected multiple times (like a certain Congressman after whom we renamed the largest post office in the state). Also, why have we renamed BOTH the Center Township government center AND the new bus terminal/bum hangout after Julia Carson?

ADVERTISEMENT