ILNews

AG to appeal secretary of state ineligibility case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller will appeal on behalf of the Indiana Recount Commission the decision by a judge that found Secretary of State Charlie White ineligible to run for office.

Marion Circuit Judge Lou Rosenberg ruled Dec. 21 that White couldn’t be a candidate for the state office in the November 2010 election because he allegedly committed voter fraud. In June 2011, the Indiana Recount Commission unanimously voted to allow White to remain in office; the Indiana Democratic Party appealed, which led to Rosenberg finding that White wasn’t residing at the home he listed for voting as is statutorily required.

The Recount Commission said it planned on appealing but wouldn’t be able to take up the issue immediately because of uncertainty about the commission’s membership and 48-hour notice requirements for meeting.

On Dec. 23, Zoeller sent out a statement saying he will appeal the ruling for the Recount Commission. He said that his office represents the state and the public interest and it isn’t necessary for the AG’s office to wait to appeal until the commission can meet and vote on seeking an appeal. Zoeller’s statement says that the motions to trigger the appeal will be filed “soon.”

 

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. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT