ILNews

Justices take two cases

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The Indiana Supreme Court has granted transfer to two cases – a civil case involving a car accident and an appeal from a convicted child molester.

The justices accepted Henry C. Bennett, et. al. v. John E. Richmond, et. al., No. 20A03-0906-CV-285, in which Henry C. Bennett had appealed the trial court’s motion to correct error following a jury verdict in favor of John and Jennifer Richmond.

The appeals court concluded that the trial court abused its discretion by allowing a doctor to testify that Richmond sustained a brain injury as a result of the car accident with Bennett and had remanded for a new trial.

In Keith Hoglund v. State of Indiana, No. 90A02-1005-CR-591, appellant/defendant Keith Hoglund had appealed his conviction and sentence for Class A felony child molesting, contending the trial court abused its discretion in admitting testimony regarding whether the victim was falsifying or exaggerating stories of Hoglund’s molestation of the victim. He also contended the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him and that his 50-year sentence was inappropriately harsh.

The appeals court concluded that the serious, ongoing nature of the offense justified the 50-year sentence and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony that indirectly vouched for the victim’s credibility.

The justices declined Jeff Koehlinger, et al. v. State Lottery Commission of Ind., No. 49A02-1003-CT-247, in which Jeff Koehlinger appealed summary judgment for the lottery, and the appeals court reversed and remanded, concluding that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment.

Only Justice Steven David voted to grant the petition to transfer for Koehlinger.
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Frankly, it is tragic that you are even considering going to an expensive, unaccredited "law school." It is extremely difficult to get a job with a degree from a real school. If you are going to make the investment of time, money, and tears into law school, it should not be to a place that won't actually enable you to practice law when you graduate.

  2. As a lawyer who grew up in Fort Wayne (but went to a real law school), it is not that hard to find a mentor in the legal community without your school's assistance. One does not need to pay tens of thousands of dollars to go to an unaccredited legal diploma mill to get a mentor. Having a mentor means precisely nothing if you cannot get a job upon graduation, and considering that the legal job market is utterly terrible, these students from Indiana Tech are going to be adrift after graduation.

  3. 700,000 to 800,000 Americans are arrested for marijuana possession each year in the US. Do we need a new justice center if we decriminalize marijuana by having the City Council enact a $100 fine for marijuana possession and have the money go towards road repair?

  4. I am sorry to hear this.

  5. I tried a case in Judge Barker's court many years ago and I recall it vividly as a highlight of my career. I don't get in federal court very often but found myself back there again last Summer. We had both aged a bit but I must say she was just as I had remembered her. Authoritative, organized and yes, human ...with a good sense of humor. I also appreciated that even though we were dealing with difficult criminal cases, she treated my clients with dignity and understanding. My clients certainly respected her. Thanks for this nice article. Congratulations to Judge Barker for reaching another milestone in a remarkable career.

ADVERTISEMENT