ILNews

Opinions Aug. 19, 2014

August 19, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Monday:
United States of America v. Kenneth Jones, Ramone Mockabee, Devon Young and Elisha Drake
11-2267, 11-2288, 11-2535, 11-2687
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Affirms cocaine distribution and other drug convictions of Jones, Drake and Young after a jury trial, but vacates the sentences of Mockabee, who pleaded guilty, Jones and Drake and remands their cases for resentencing.  The trial court did not err in denying Jones’ motion to suppress evidence found at his house after a search warrant was executed. There is sufficient evidence to support their convictions, but there are sentencing errors related to Mockabee, Jones and Drake.

United States of America v. Juan Carlos Adame-Hernandez
12-1268
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Vacates Adame-Hernandez’s conviction and 300-month sentence under a second guilty plea for criminal drug conspiracy and remands with instructions to allow him to maintain his original guilty plea and be sentenced under the parties’ written plea agreement executed Jan. 3, 2011. Circuit Rule 36 applies on remand. The District Court did not follow the procedures under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Adoption of M.H., W.M. & S.K. v. N.B. & R.B.
82A01-1310-AD-449
Adoption.  Affirms order denying W.M. and S.K.’s petition for adoption of M.H. and granting the petition of adoption filed by R.B. and N.B. The appellants did not overcome the presumption that the judge acted impartially when he ruled in favor of N.B. and R.B. The judge received an email from a former fraternity brother in favor of the adoptive family, but he refused to recuse himself in the case because he said he would not consider the person’s argument, stopped reading the email quickly, and had not recently socialized or interacted with the fraternity brother. Finds evidence supports adoption by N.B. and R.B. in the best interests of the child.

Lisa B. Gonzalez v. R. Stanton Evans
29A02-1311-DR-984
Domestic relation.  Reverses award of $8,289.33 in attorney fees to Evans. The attorney fees awarded to Evans exceeds the bounds of what is contemplated by Trial Rule 34(C)(3.) There was no reasonable resistance related to Gonzalez’s subpoena by Evans and he was not entitled to any attorney fees related to such resistance. Remands for a determination of how much Evans actually incurred in relation to his compliance with the subpoena, excluding such fees related to his months-long effort to avoid providing the documents to Gonzalez. Finds Gonzalez waived her claim to attorney fees.

Eric T. Shamblin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1311-CR-994
Criminal.  Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted child molesting and finding Shamblin is a sexually violent predator.

Sean D. Monroe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1401-CR-28
Criminal. Affirms Monroe’s eight-year sentence following a guilty plea to Class C felony operating a motor vehicle with a controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II in his blood and Class D felony reckless homicide. Remands for the trial court to correct a clerical error in the abstract of judgment.

In the Matter of the Parent Child Relationship of: M.G. (Minor Child), and S.B. (Father) v. Marion County Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1312-JT-1028
Juvenile.  Affirms termination of parental rights.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT