ILNews

Justices take 2 cases

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has accepted the case in which the Indiana Court of Appeals split in reversing a man’s Class A felony attempted murder conviction.

The justices took Tyrus D. Coleman v. State of Indiana, No. 20S03-1008-CR-458, in which the majority ruled the doctrine of issue preclusion barred the state from re-litgating the issue of whether Tyrus Coleman’s actions against Anthony Dye constituted attempted murder. Coleman shot Dye twice during a confrontation at a recording studio.

The majority reversed the denial of Coleman’s motion to dismiss his attempted murder charge by reason of collateral estoppel. The jury wasn’t able to reach a verdict as to his attempted murder charge and another trial on that charge was scheduled.

Judge Carr Darden dissented, disagreeing that issue preclusion applies to the instant case. He concluded the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion in allowing Coleman to be re-tried for attempted murder.

The justices issued an order Monday accepting transfer in the case Lamar Advertising Inc. v. View Outdoor Advertising LLC and State of Indiana, Dept. of Transportation, No. 49S05-1008-CV-459. They summarily affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision instructing the Indiana Department of Transportation to allow the parties to file new applications for a billboard permit and the lower court’s interpretation of an administrative rule as requiring INDOT to grant the first valid application it receives.

The Supreme Court also ordered INDOT to treat as concurrently filed any billboard permit application it gets from the parties within three business days of the date on which the Clerk certifies this order as final.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Is it possible to amend an order for child support due to false paternity?

  2. He did not have an "unlicensed handgun" in his pocket. Firearms are not licensed in Indiana. He apparently possessed a handgun without a license to carry, but it's not the handgun that is licensed (or registered).

  3. Once again, Indiana's legislature proves how friendly it is to monopolies. This latest bill by Hershman demonstrates the lengths Indiana's representatives are willing to go to put big business's (especially utilities') interests above those of everyday working people. Maassal argues that if the technology (solar) is so good, it will be able to compete on its own. Too bad he doesn't feel the same way about the industries he represents. Instead, he wants to cut the small credit consumers get for using solar in order to "add a 'level of certainty'" to his industry. I haven't heard of or seen such a blatant money-grab by an industry since the days when our federal, state, and local governments were run by the railroad. Senator Hershman's constituents should remember this bill the next time he runs for office, and they should penalize him accordingly.

  4. From his recent appearance on WRTV to this story here, Frank is everywhere. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, although he should stop using Eric Schnauffer for his 7th Circuit briefs. They're not THAT hard.

  5. They learn our language prior to coming here. My grandparents who came over on the boat, had to learn English and become familiarize with Americas customs and culture. They are in our land now, speak ENGLISH!!

ADVERTISEMENT