David Bleeke v. State of Indiana, et al. - 11/13/12

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  November 13, 2012 
11:00 AM  EST

11 a.m. 02A05-1201-PL-25. After the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the State in this declaratory judgment action, Bleeke filed a notice of appeal. Among the questions presented in this appeal are: 1)whether designated Indiana Parole Board conditions of parole are void because they were not promulgated pursuant to Indiana Code section 11-13-3-4(b); 2) whether designated Indiana Parole Board conditions of parole are void because they were imposed without the Indiana Parole Board first making an individualized determination that the conditions were reasonably related to Bleeke's reintegration into the community and that the conditions were not unduly restrictive of Bleeke's fundamental rights; 3) whether designated Indiana Parole Board conditions of parole are unconstitutionally vague or overbroad; 4) whether Indiana Code sections 11-13-3-4(g) and 35-42-4-11 are facially overbroad; 5) whether the State's "Sex Offender Management and Monitoring Program" is unconstitutional; and 6) whether the trial court erred in not dismissing Bleeke's action against parties other than the Parole Board.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A sad end to a prolific gadfly. Indiana has suffered a great loss in the journalistic realm.

  2. Good riddance to this dangerous activist judge

  3. What is the one thing the Hoosier legal status quo hates more than a whistleblower? A lawyer whistleblower taking on the system man to man. That must never be rewarded, must always, always, always be punished, lest the whole rotten tree be felled.

  4. I want to post this to keep this tread alive and hope more of David's former clients might come forward. In my case, this coward of a man represented me from June 2014 for a couple of months before I fired him. I knew something was wrong when he blatantly lied about what he had advised me in my contentious and unfortunate divorce trial. His impact on the proceedings cast a very long shadow and continues to impact me after a lengthy 19 month divorce. I would join a class action suit.

  5. The dispute in LB Indiana regarding lake front property rights is typical of most beach communities along our Great Lakes. Simply put, communication to non owners when visiting the lakefront would be beneficial. The Great Lakes are designated navigational waters (including shorelines). The high-water mark signifies the area one is able to navigate. This means you can walk, run, skip, etc. along the shores. You can't however loiter, camp, sunbath in front of someones property. Informational signs may be helpful to owners and visitors. Our Great Lakes are a treasure that should be enjoyed by all. PS We should all be concerned that the Long Beach, Indiana community is on septic systems.