Post conviction

Appeals court reverses vacation of habitual traffic violator status

September 24, 2012
Dave Stafford
A trial court erred when it set aside a man’s 2002 guilty plea on a charge of operating a vehicle while a habitual traffic violator, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Monday.
More

COA finds petitioner failed to show trial counsel was ineffective

August 27, 2012
Marilyn Odendahl
In affirming a post-conviction court’s judgment, the Indiana Court of Appeals found a convicted child molester failed to carry his burden in claiming that his attorney was ineffective.
More

Bunch freed after 16 years in prison

August 23, 2012
IL Staff
Kristine Bunch, the woman who claimed she was wrongfully convicted of killing her son in a fire in 1995, was released from prison following a bond hearing Wednesday in Decatur County. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed her convictions and ordered a new trial on the murder charge.
More

Man had no constitutional right to counsel

August 20, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a man’s claims in support of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding his motion to correct sentence wasn’t a motion pursuant to Indiana Code, but was a collateral attack on his sentence.
More

Woman unable to prove attorney actions were prejudicial

August 13, 2012
Marilyn Odendahl
A woman’s petition for post-conviction relief on the grounds her trial counsel was ineffective was denied by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
More

Man unable to show prejudice by attorney’s lack of deportation advisement

August 7, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Pakistan-born man who faces automatic deportation as a result of his guilty plea to felony theft lost his pursuit for post-conviction relief before the Indiana Court of Appeals. The judges found Naveed Gulzar was unable to show he was prejudiced by his attorney’s failure to advise him that automatic deportation is a consequence of his guilty plea.
More

Appeals court upholds killer’s PCR denial

July 27, 2012
Dave Stafford
A man convicted of murder in Delaware County is not entitled to post-conviction relief due to ineffective counsel, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
More

Supreme Court affirms death sentence in 2001 rape, murder

June 22, 2012
Dave Stafford
A man whose death sentence and murder and rape convictions previously were reversed on appeal to the Indiana Supreme Court remains condemned after the justices on Thursday affirmed a trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief.
More

Supreme Court revises felony sentence

June 20, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
Four Indiana justices decided that a man who pleaded guilty to Class B felony possession of cocaine should have been sentenced to 12 years instead of 20.
More

Man loses insanity defense appeal

June 20, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A Marion County court correctly rejected the insanity defense entered by a man who suffers from bipolar disorder and alcoholism in his attempted murder bench trial, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled.
More

Judges uphold college student's rape conviction

June 20, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The man charged with raping a fellow Vincennes University student following a night of drinking had his conviction affirmed by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
More

Justices vacate transfer to Criminal Rule 4(B) appeal

June 14, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court has decided that a Court of Appeals decision reversing the denial of man’s motion for discharge will stand.
More

Court dismisses appeal because order isn't final

May 25, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed sua sponte a man’s appeal of his conviction of and sentence for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine, because the order he appeals from isn’t a final judgment.
More

Trial court ordered to determine if man was diligent in pursuing appeal

May 23, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals held that a man cannot appeal the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, but the trial court should determine whether the defendant has been without fault and diligent in pursuit of his original appeal of child molesting convictions.
More

Judges uphold jury's rejection of insanity defense

May 10, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
A woman convicted of murdering her young son has lost her appeal, in which she claimed the jury didn’t have sufficient evidence to reject her insanity defense.
More

Courts not responsible to find person named in subpoena

April 27, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
It is not up to the court to find someone named in a subpoena if the person requesting it doesn’t know where to send the subpoena, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled. That argument was being made by an incarcerated father appealing a determination that his child is in need of services.
More

Judges affirm denial of post-conviction relief

March 28, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals found a man’s double jeopardy claims were without merit, so his trial and direct appeal attorneys’ failure to raise these claims created no prejudice.
More

Appellate court split on ordering new trial for mom

March 21, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals has ordered a woman convicted of killing her son by setting fire to their home in 1996 receive a new trial, although one judge believed she did not meet her burden to prevail on appeal from the denial of her petition for post-conviction relief.
More

Judges disagree on impact of caselaw

March 20, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
In a man’s appeal of the denial of petition for post-conviction relief, in which he claimed ineffective assistance of his trial and appellate counsel, the Indiana Court of Appeals was divided on whether his appellate counsel was ineffective and if caselaw prevented the trial court from considering charges outside of the guilty plea.
More

Judges affirm denial of post-conviction relief

February 23, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals declined to find an attorney provided ineffective assistance of trial counsel to a man on trial for the second time because that attorney didn’t defend the case in the same manner as did the attorney on the first trial.
More

Justices address Batson challenges in 2 appeals

February 22, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Supreme Court ruled on two cases Wednesday that stemmed from Batson challenges, and in doing so, articulated the standard of review of such challenges when a defendant raises a Batson challenge at the trial level, but then brings up a different argument on appeal.
More

Appellate court reverses grant of post-conviction relief

February 21, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals found that the post-conviction court erred when it concluded that a defendant had not knowingly waived his right to counsel.
More

Judges disagree on state's ability to appeal

February 16, 2012
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Court of Appeals issued a divided ruling Thursday on whether the state could appeal the denial of its motion to correct error after the trial court granted a defendant’s motion to suppress evidence. The majority decided the state’s appeal should be dismissed as untimely.
More

7th Circuit affirms denial of habeas corpus petition

January 31, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
A man who stabbed his wife repeatedly, leaving her with a collapsed lung and ruptured spleen, was unable to prove that he received ineffective counsel at trial, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals held.
More

On petition for rehearing, appellate court affirms original opinion in drug case

January 31, 2012
Jenny Montgomery
A man convicted of Class D felony possession of methamphetamine asked the Indiana Court of Appeals to review its original opinion affirming the trial court.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Falk said “At this point, at this minute, we’ll savor this particular victory.” “It certainly is a historic week on this front,” Cockrum said. “What a delight ... “Happy Independence Day to the women of the state of Indiana,” WOW. So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)

  2. congratulations on such balanced journalism; I also love how fetus disposal affects women's health protection, as covered by Roe...

  3. It truly sickens me every time a case is compared to mine. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld my convictions based on a finding of “hidden threats.” The term “hidden threat” never appeared until the opinion in Brewington so I had no way of knowing I was on trial for making hidden threats because Dearborn County Prosecutor F Aaron Negangard argued the First Amendment didn't protect lies. Negangard convened a grand jury to investigate me for making “over the top” and “unsubstantiated” statements about court officials, not hidden threats of violence. My indictments and convictions were so vague, the Indiana Court of Appeals made no mention of hidden threats when they upheld my convictions. Despite my public defender’s closing arguments stating he was unsure of exactly what conduct the prosecution deemed to be unlawful, Rush found that my lawyer’s trial strategy waived my right to the fundamental error of being tried for criminal defamation because my lawyer employed a strategy that attempted to take advantage of Negangard's unconstitutional criminal defamation prosecution against me. Rush’s opinion stated the prosecution argued two grounds for conviction one constitutional and one not, however the constitutional true threat “argument” consistently of only a blanket reading of subsection 1 of the intimidation statute during closing arguments, making it impossible to build any kind of defense. Of course intent was impossible for my attorney to argue because my attorney, Rush County Chief Public Defender Bryan Barrett refused to meet with me prior to trial. The record is littered with examples of where I made my concerns known to the trial judge that I didn’t know the charges against me, I did not have access to evidence, all while my public defender refused to meet with me. Special Judge Brian Hill, from Rush Superior Court, refused to address the issue with my public defender and marched me to trial without access to evidence or an understanding of the indictments against me. Just recently the Indiana Public Access Counselor found that four over four years Judge Hill has erroneously denied access to the grand jury audio from my case, the most likely reason being the transcription of the grand jury proceedings omitted portions of the official audio record. The bottom line is any intimidation case involves an action or statement that is debatably a threat of physical violence. There were no such statements in my case. The Indiana Supreme Court took partial statements I made over a period of 41 months and literally connected them with dots… to give the appearance that the statements were made within the same timeframe and then claimed a person similarly situated would find the statements intimidating while intentionally leaving out surrounding contextual factors. Even holding the similarly situated test was to be used in my case, the prosecution argued that the only intent of my public writings was to subject the “victims” to ridicule and hatred so a similarly situated jury instruction wouldn't even have applied in my case. Chief Justice Rush wrote the opinion while Rush continued to sit on a committee with one of the alleged victims in my trial and one of the judges in my divorce, just as she'd done for the previous 7+ years. All of this information, including the recent PAC opinion against the Dearborn Superior Court II can be found on my blog www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.

  4. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  5. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

ADVERTISEMENT