ILNews

Opinions Dec. 30, 2013

December 30, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court was posted after IL deadline Friday:
Joseph & Jeanne Hutcherson v. Robin L. Ward, Hamilton County Assessor
49T10-1302-TA-10
Tax. Denies Hamilton County assessor’s motion to dismiss the Hutchersons’ claims and reverses the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s determination that the Hutchersons’ petitions to correct error for 2004 through 2007 were untimely. Finds the Petition to Correct Error Statute contains no provisions limiting the length of time a taxpayer has to file a petition. Remands for action consistent with the court’s opinion.

Monday's opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals
Rico Nathaniel Morst v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1305-CR-226
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Morst’s probation.

Jeremiah Joseph Skirvin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
55A01-1305-CR-232
Criminal. Affirms aggregate sentence of 55 years for two counts of sexual misconduct with a minor, as Class B felonies; one count of sexual misconduct with a minor, as a Class C felony; and being adjudicated as a habitual offender.

State of Indiana v. Tammy Sue Harper (NFP)
79A02-1303-CR-272
Criminal. Reverses order from the Tippecanoe Circuit Court modifying the sentence of Harper. Although the prosecuting attorney did not tell the trial court whether it approved of or objected to the sentence modification, the COA held that according to the “clear language” of Indiana Code 35-38-1-17, the prosecutor must approve of a sentence modification if the convicted person has served more than 365 days of his or her sentence.

George Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1304-CR-326
Criminal. Affirms conviction of attempted murder as a Class A felony.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.M. (Minor Child) and D.D. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A05-1305-JT-258
Juvenile. Affirms termination of father D.D.’s parental rights.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court did not post any opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals did not submit any Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT