ILNews

JTAC fee, Clark County courts bills before committees

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A bill that would increase the automated record-keeping fee to pay for implementation of a statewide case-management system and a bill that proposes to create a unified Circuit Court in Clark County are just two of the bills before committees this week in the Indiana General Assembly.

Senate Bill 301, which deals with the automated record-keeping fee, will be heard at 8 a.m. Tuesday before the Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee. The Senate Judiciary Committee reassigned the bill to this committee last week. The bill proposes that the automated record-keeping fee should be increased to $10 from July 1, 2011, to June 30, 2015. The $3 increase from the current fee will help pay for Odyssey, a case-management system run by the Indiana Supreme Court’s Judicial Technology and Automation Committee. After June 30, 2015, the fee would return to the current $7 charge.

The Senate Corrections, Criminal, and Civil Matters Committee meets at 9 a.m. Tuesday to discuss eight bills, including Senate Bill 540 on the discharge of long-term inmates and Senate Bill 561 on corrections and sentencing.

At 9 a.m. Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hear six bills focusing on the following areas: Senate Bill 459, access to identifying information for adoptions; Senate Bill 96, which would add a state-paid deputy prosecuting attorney in Cass County; Senate Bill 63, suspension of local officeholders from office; Senate Bill 520, enforcement of foreign law; Senate Bill 34, interstate compact for juveniles; and Senate Bill 180, limited partnerships and liability companies.

The committee meets again at 9 a.m. Friday to discuss the following legislative proposals: Senate Bill 582, settlement conferences in residential foreclosures; Senate Bill 465, Department of Child Services matters; Senate Bill 215, forfeiture and amount of law enforcement costs; Senate Bill 463, mandatory retirement age for trial court judges; Senate Bill 212, trial court jurisdiction and the repealing of laws on county courts; and Senate Bill 214, state use of contingency fee counsel.

On Wednesday, the House Family, Children, and Human Affairs Committee meets at 10:30 a.m. to discuss four bills including House Bill 1316, which establishes the Division of Youth Services Transitional Services Fund to provide juvenile transitional services to delinquent offenders. The bill also allows a juvenile court to order a parent or guardian to pay or reimburse the Department of Correction for costs incurred by the department for a child who is committed to the DOC.

At 1:30 p.m. Wednesday, the House Courts and Criminal Code Committee will hear House Bill 1416, on credit time for approved correspondence courses; House Bill 1324 on child molesting; and House Bill 1266 on the creation of a unified Circuit Court for Clark County.
 

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT