Eric Danner v. State of Indiana - 4/3/14

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Thursday  April 3, 2014 
10:50 AM  EST

10:50 a.m. 71S03-1402-PC-73. In this post-conviction proceeding, Danner asserted that as a result of having been prosecuted for certain traffic offenses filed in a St. Joseph traffic court, he could not also be prosecuted for felony possession of cocaine and other offenses in a St. Joseph felony court.  See Danner v. State, 900 N.E.2d 9 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (affirming the felony conviction).  As a result, he argued, he had been deprived of the effective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney had not moved for dismissal of the felony court charges pursuant to the “successive prosecution statute,” Indiana Code section 35-41-4-4(a).  The post-conviction court denied relief, noting that the evidence presented at the post-conviction hearing provided no basis for determining the prevailing professional norm, given the apparently unique circumstances of the case.  The Court of Appeals affirmed in Danner v. State, No. 71A03-1304-PC-146 (Ind. Ct. App. Oct. 30, 2013) (NFP mem. dec.), vacated.  The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.

Back to Events
Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  2. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  3. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  4. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

  5. Oh yes, lifetime tenure. The Founders gave that to the federal judges .... at that time no federal district courts existed .... so we are talking the Supreme Court justices only in context that they could rule against traditional marriage and for the other pet projects of the sixties generation. Right. Hmmmm, but I must admit, there is something from that time frame that seems to recommend itself in this context ..... on yes, from a document the Founders penned in 1776: " He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."