ILNews

Opinions March 26, 2014

March 26, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of I.P., T.P. v. Indiana Department of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc.
49S02-1402-JT-81
Juvenile. Reverses termination of parental rights. Finds the procedure used violated the father T.P.’s due process rights. The magistrate who presided over the termination hearing resigned before reporting recommended findings and conclusions to the judge. Another magistrate, without holding a new evidentiary hearing, reviewed the record and reported recommended findings and conclusions to the judge, who ordered the mother’s parental rights terminated. Holds Trial Rule 63(A) is inapplicable.

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of S.B., Ay.B., A.B. and K.G., K.G. v. Marion County Department of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc.
49S02-1402-JT-77
Juvenile. Reverses termination of parental rights. Finds the procedure used violated parent K.G.’s due process rights. The magistrate who presided over the termination hearing resigned before reporting recommended findings and conclusions to the judge. Another magistrate, without holding a new evidentiary hearing, reviewed the record and reported recommended findings and conclusions to the judge, who ordered the mother’s parental rights terminated.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Adam Bigger v. State of Indiana
02A03-1308-CR-315
Criminal. Affirms conviction and 8-year sentence for Class C felony attempted robbery. Since Bigger did not raise the issue of the defense of abandonment or indicate his intent to rely on the defense at the trial court level, the issue is waived.

Brian Byrd v. State of Indiana
10A01-1309-IF-383
Infraction. Reverses judgment against Byrd for the civil infraction of speeding for driving 54 mph in a 30 mph zone. Finds there was a failure of proof as Byrd produced evidence that contradicted the prima facie speed allegation.

Donovan Ball v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1308-CR-714
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony criminal gang activity and Class A felony attempted murder.

Matthew Ramsey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1308-CR-704
Criminal. Affirms revocation of work release placement and probation.

Jonah Long v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1308-CR-392
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in methamphetamine and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Caleb J. Brubaker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
08A05-1310-CR-492
Criminal. Affirms conviction of resisting law enforcement as a Class A misdemeanor.

Robbie L. Hubbard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A05-1310-CR-512
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor conversion.

Bradley P. Burcham v. Nichole (Burcham) Fillmore (NFP)
49A04-1307-DR-347
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of Burcham’s appeal of the denial of his petition to increase visitation consistent with the Indiana Parenting Time Guidelines.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT