September 9, 2011
Jenny MontgomeryThe Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld a post-conviction court’s determination that a man convicted of kicking another
man to death cannot appeal his conviction.
More
August 23, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals has upheld the decision to deny a man’s request for post-conviction relief, finding that
although his attorney’s performance was deficient for not investigating whether a previous conviction attributed to
the defendant was really his, the man couldn’t show he was prejudiced.
More
June 8, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe failure of a judge to inquire into a defendant’s written complaint about his public defender didn’t violate
the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, the Indiana Supreme Court held Wednesday.
However, the justices explained if a trial judge finds him or herself in a situation similar to the one presented, that judge
should at least receive assurances from the public defender’s office that the complaint has been adequately addressed.
More
June 8, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that the Northern District of Indiana was essentially creating a built-in
appeal issue on ineffective assistance of counsel, and it called out a senior judge for violating a man’s Sixth Amendment
right to choose his own lawyer.
More
April 28, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the denial of a defendant’s motion to vacate his guilty plea, claiming ineffective
assistance of trial counsel. The judges found the record foreclosed any claim that the man’s attorney was constitutionally
ineffective or that the man didn’t otherwise knowingly and voluntarily plead guilty.
More
April 14, 2011
Jennifer NelsonFundamental error and prejudice for ineffective assistance of trial counsel present two substantively different questions,
the Indiana Court of Appeals concluded Thursday in a post-conviction case.
More
March 30, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe Supreme Court of the United States is being asked to consider an Indiana case about a convicted murderer’s claim
that he was improperly restrained with a stun belt during his trial and that led to a wrongful conviction.
More
March 21, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court will decide whether a man convicted of murder and rape was denied effective assistance of appellate
counsel.
More
February 7, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed in part the denial of a man’s pro se petition for post-conviction relief, holding
the post-conviction court’s findings didn’t support its rejection of the man’s claim his plea was illusory
or involuntary.
More
February 3, 2011
Jennifer NelsonA man who received 50 years for murder should be re-sentenced because of conflicting amendments involving the penalty for
murder at the time the judge handed down the sentence, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
More
January 26, 2011
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court has unanimously affirmed the denial of a murderer’s petition for post-conviction relief, leaving
his death sentence in place.
More
January 14, 2011
Michael HoskinsThe full 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has decided to not rehear an Indiana case about a convicted murder’s ineffective
assistance of trial counsel claims relating to a stun belt used in court, though three judges disagreed and felt the northern
Indiana federal judge’s decision should be upheld.
More
November 10, 2010
IL StaffThe Indiana Supreme Court has decided not to take the case of a man who claimed he received ineffective assistance of trial
counsel.
More
November 3, 2010
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals agreed with the post-conviction court that a defendant didn’t receive ineffective assistance
of trial counsel, finding the man had no right to the effective assistance of counsel at the time he gave a statement to police
in front of the attorney.
More
April 24, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer Thursday to an ineffective assistance of trial counsel case and a case involving
the testimony at trial of a previous victim of a defendant.
More
April 7, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of a man's petition for post-conviction relief, finding the defendant's
trial counsel wasn't ineffective for arguing a single larceny rule defense because it wasn't applicable in this case.
More
March 27, 2009
Jennifer NelsonEven though a defendant's counsel was found to be ineffective based on his "television fantasy" trial strategy,
the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court denial of his petition for habeas corpus because he didn't
show he was prejudiced by his attorney's performance.
More
February 2, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to two cases Jan. 29, one involving statements given to police and the other whether
a man's trial counsel was ineffective.
More
Judge Roger B. Cosbey is unethical and bias toward African American who seeks justice in Title VII claims. He disrespected and used his authority to attempt to intimidate me into taking an unfair settlement and when I refused he proceeded to get my case dismissed and to deny me my Constitutional and Civil Rights. He disobeying several rules of law; specifically, by ruling on summary judgment motions against the Fed. R. Civ. P., without authority of Judge William C. Lee, without consent of the attorneys, and with conspiracy to commit “fraud on the court,” as he conspired with my former attorney. He proved to me that he is bias, unethical, unfair and unfit to be reappointed. In my opinion, he should be disbarred in 2013, for committing fraud on the court, which would make him ineligible for reinstatement in 2014. See docket 3:07 cv 629 where he rules on dispositive motions, knowing magistrates are not vested with that power (especially without consent), grants the defendant an unconscionable number of extensions, accepts my former attorney request for extension for dispositive motion knowing he was working with the opposition, and unbelievably grants the defendant another extension after he requested an extension after he missed the deadline. I know another attorney filed charges against him for bias in race discrimination case(s). I know what he did in my case before he voluntarily recused himself, I just do not know how many other innocent people have been stripped of their rights because of him. I say shame on him and no more of the same.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.