Bills heading to governor’s desk

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

As the legislative session heads toward its March 14 close, several bills have passed both houses and are on their way to Gov. Mike Pence for his signature.

Senate Bill 3 was approved Tuesday in the House of Representatives 91-4. The legislation makes battery a Level 6 felony instead of a Class B misdemeanor if the offense is committed against certain judicial officers while they are engaged in official duties. Battery becomes a Level 5 felony instead of a Class B misdemeanor if the offense results in bodily injury while a judicial officer is engaged in official duties or if the person who committed the offense placed certain infected bodily fluids or wastes on the judicial officer.

The bill also outlines when and where certain judicial officers may possess a firearm.

Senate Bill 339, which allows alcohol sales at the Indiana State Fair, passed 75-20 Tuesday in the House of Representatives. The bill will end a nearly 70-year-old ban on beer and alcohol sales at the fair. Indiana is the only state that continues to ban alcohol from its state fair.

Senate Bill 101, dubbed the “ag-gag” bill, passed the House 73-25 Tuesday. The legislation states that a person commits criminal trespass if, without an owner’s permission, he enters a portion of an agricultural operation used for production or any part of the real property of an agricultural operation, and causes property damage.

The bill, as introduced, allowed agricultural operators to post a notice that lists prohibited acts that may compromise the operation’s trade secrets or operations. Someone who intentionally or knowingly committed an act at the agricultural operation that is prohibited and listed on that notice would have committed a Level 6 felony. The introduced bill also raised the penalty for criminal trespass if certain levels of pecuniary loss result from the criminal trespass.

The bill was opposed by animal rights groups and the Hoosier State Press Association, which believe it is intended to silence or punish whistleblowers regarding agricultural and animal conditions.

Other bills are heading back to their house of origin after being amended. House Bill 1140, which requires the Department of Correction to create policies that provide for a schedule of progressive parole incentives and violation sanctions, passed the Senate 47-0 with amendments.

The House returned Senate Bill 27 to senators after approving the petitions for adoption legislation 95-0 with amendments. The bill, among other things, provides that the court in which a petition for adoption has been filed has exclusive jurisdiction over the child if there is a petition for adoption and a paternity action pending at the same time.


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues