Tammy Lou Kelley v. State of Indiana - 11/21/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Thursday  November 21, 2013 
12:30 PM  EST

09A04-1303-CR-98 12:30 p.m. Michigan City High School. The State charged Tammy Lou Kelley with attempted murder, criminal confinement, battery resulting in bodily injury, two counts of battery on law enforcement officers, and resisting law enforcement, all stemming from an incident in which she stabbed a child left in her care and was uncooperative and combative with officers who arrived to assist.  Kelley requested a psychiatric, competency, and mental status evaluation.  Two court-appointed doctors filed reports finding Kelley competent for purposes of trial but unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of her conduct at the time of the offense.  At the bench trial, the parties stipulated to the police reports, medical reports, and psychiatric evaluations.  No live testimony was taken.  At the conclusion of the bench trial, the trial court found Kelley not guilty of attempted murder, and guilty but mentally ill with respect to the remaining counts.  Kelley appeals her convictions, contending first that the trial court erred in finding her guilty but mentally ill when the uncontradicted evidence was that she was insane at the time of the incident.  She also contends there was insufficient evidence to support her convictions, and that convictions of both battery and confinement of the child victim constitute double jeopardy.  Finally, she contends the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences without articulating an adequate basis for doing so.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT