ILNews

COA travels to Lafayette, IU campuses

IL Staff
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Indiana Court of Appeals will visit three Indiana colleges April 8 and 9 to hear arguments in cases regarding child molestation, defamatory statements, and ineffective counsel.

Judges will visit Ivy Tech Community College in Lafayette Tuesday to hear arguments regarding a case on appeal from Lake Superior Court. Arguments for Victor Vega Torres v. State of Indiana, 45A03-0708-CR-385, begin at 10 a.m. in Ivy Hall. Judges Ezra Friedlander, Margret Robb, and Cale Bradford will have to decide whether Torres' maximum sentence of eight years following a guilty plea to child molesting is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the fact he has a history of mental illness.

Also on Tuesday, Judges James Kirsch, Melissa May, and Patricia Riley will hear arguments in Thomas Williams and Sanford Kelsey v. Kelly E. Tharp and Papa John's USA, Inc., 29A02-0707-CV-625, at 5 p.m. at Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis in the Wynne Courtroom in Inlow Hall. At issue in the case on appeal from Hamilton Circuit Court is whether the trial court erred in finding Tharp did not make defamatory statements by telling police that Williams and Kelsey pulled a gun when they picked up a pizza from a Papa John's restaurant. The court will also have to decide if the trial court erred in ruling Tharp didn't act intentionally or in an extreme or outrageous manner.

On Wednesday, the three-judge panel of Bradford, May, and L. Mark Bailey travel to Indiana University Southeast in New Albany to hear arguments in Charles Sweeney v. State of Indiana, 10A01-0707-PC-303, at 12:30 p.m. in the Hoosier Room West in the University Center North building. The appellate court is asked to decide whether Sweeney deserves post-conviction relief because of ineffective counsel following his conviction of murder and sentence of 60 years. The case is on appeal from Clark Circuit Court.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT