battery
Booking card exception to hearsay rule
June 30, 2010
Jennifer NelsonA booking card created by law enforcement in the course of a ministerial, nonevaluative booking process is not subject to
the police reports exclusion under Indiana Evidence Rule 803(8), the Indiana Court of Appeals decided today.
MoreJustices: No error in declaring mistrial
April 28, 2010
A trial court's determination to discharge a jury at a defendant's second trial wasn't an abuse of discretion,
the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
MoreConsent not defense in battery case
September 9, 2009
Jennifer NelsonBecause consent is not a defense to battery when a deadly weapon is used, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed a man's
convictions of felony and misdemeanor battery on his girlfriend after branding her with a hot knife and hitting her with a
cord.
MoreCourt erred in denying court-appointed counsel
September 2, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a man's convictions because the trial court failed to adequately ascertain whether
he was indigent for purposes of court-appointed counsel.
MoreJudges: amendment not retroactive
August 11, 2009
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that an estate's interpretation of a 2003 amendment to Indiana Code would
threaten the fiscal health of governmental entities and that the amendment isn't retroactive.
MoreCourt affirms student's convictions
June 19, 2009
Jennifer NelsonAfter examining the few Indiana decisions on tumultuous conduct in the context of sufficiency of evidence to support a disorderly
conduct conviction, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a high school student's conviction for behavior involving the dean
of students. The high court also affirmed the student's battery conviction against the assistant principal.
MoreMan isn't entitled to parental privilege defense
March 4, 2009
Jennifer NelsonIn an issue of first impression, the Indiana Court of Appeals had to decide whether a defendant who lived in a woman's
home in exchange for babysitting her children would fall under the parental privilege defense for disciplining a child.
MoreTrial court couldn't modify man's sentence
January 28, 2009
Jennifer NelsonFinding the addition of the term "imposed" to an amendment of Indiana Code Section 35-38-1-17(a) in 2005 to be critical
in a man's appeal of his sentence, the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of his motion to modify his second
sentence.
MoreAppeals court reverses student's convictions
September 19, 2008
Michael HoskinsThe Indiana Court of Appeals has reversed a teenager's convictions for battery and disorderly conduct stemming from a
face-off with an assistant principal and dean of students in the school cafeteria.
MoreCourt split on mother's battery conviction
August 29, 2008
Jennifer NelsonIn a split decision by the Indiana Court of Appeals, the majority upheld a mother's conviction of battery against her
daughter, but one judge felt her conviction had to be overturned in light of a recent Indiana Supreme Court decision.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
Longest-practicing female attorney in Indiana has no plans to retire
-
Criminal code and expungement bills signed by governor
-
Lawyer who emailed nude film clip to harm ex-intern suspended 3 years
-
Indianapolis law firm Stewart & Irwin closing
-
More than half of Conour’s inventoried assets gone, feds say
-
SCOTUS rules against Indiana farmer in seed patent case
-
Social media sleuths find evidence, but admissibility requires authentication
Court Calendar
-
May 24, 2013 Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Judy Holcomb, Personal Representative of the Estate of Mable Louise Cochran, deceased - 5/24/13
-
May 28, 2013 The Estate of Richard A. Mayer and Spangler, Jennings & Dougherty, P.C., v. Lax, Inc., and David Lasco - 5/28/13
-
June 12, 2013 Northern Assurance Company of America v. Thomson, Inc., et al. - 6/12/13
-
June 18, 2013 State of Indiana v. Robert Owens - 6/18/13
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
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.