ILNews

Opinions June 5, 2013

June 5, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: K.T.K., K.C., and K.R.K. (Minor Children), and R.C. (Mother) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, Dearborn County Office
15S01-1306-JT-402
Juvenile. Sets aside the Court of Appeals order dismissing the mother’s appeal and affirms termination of parental rights. The record supports the trial court’s findings that the conditions resulting in the children’s continued placement outside of the home would not be remedied and termination of parental rights was in the best interest of the children. Denies father’s petition to transfer in separate order.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jesus S. Gil v. State of Indiana
24A04-1211-CR-603
Criminal. The trial court erred by failing to enter written probation terms after Gil pleaded guilty to one count of Class B felony burglary. Affirms the trial court did not abuse its discretion by imposing restitution and a fine because Gil’s open plea agreement left sentencing to the judge’s discretion, but erred in imposing $20,000 in restitution when the record didn’t establish the value of the jewelry taken or damages sustained. Remands with instructions to enter written probation terms and for a new restitution hearing. Affirms 12-year aggregate sentence.

Bennie Gavin v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1211-CR-565
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions to vacate Gavin’s conviction of operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent of 0.15 or more. Affirms operating while intoxicated conviction and habitual substance offender enhancement.

Richard Brock and Gail Brock v. Pamela Gilbert (NFP)
15A05-1208-PL-401
Civil plenary. Affirms ruling in favor of Gilbert that the Brocks had gifted their dog to her.

Joshua Schulkers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A05-1210-CR-497
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions to vacate Schulkers’ conviction and sentence for Class D felony battery resulting in bodily injury on a child less than 14 and affirms other battery and neglect convictions.

The Indiana Tax Court posted no decisions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT