ILNews

Appellate court travels for arguments

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

As part of its “Appeals on Wheels” initiative, the Indiana Court of Appeals will hit the road this week to hear arguments.

On Tuesday, two panels of judges will hear arguments in locations outside of the Court of Appeals courtroom, although one panel won’t have to travel far. Chief Judge John Baker and Judges Edward Najam Jr. and Nancy Vaidik will hear the case of R.J.H. v. State of Indiana, No. 71A03-1003-JV-206, in the Indiana Supreme Court courtroom. The case originates out of St. Joseph Probate Court, in which R.J.H. argues the court abused its discretion by awarding custody of him to the Department of Correction. Arguments begin at 10:30 a.m. and will be webcast live.

Judges James Kirsch, Margret Robb and Paul Mathias will be in northwestern Indiana hearing arguments in Jamarr Da-Juan Williams v. State of Indiana, No.45A03-1001-CR-39. Jamarr Da-Juan Williams argues that the trial court committed fundamental error in refusing to instruct the jury regarding the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter. He was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, battery, and attempted battery.

Arguments begin at 1 p.m. CDT at Valparaiso High School, 2727 Campbell St., Valparaiso.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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