Opinions

Opinions Aug. 5, 2014

August 5, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Marilyn R. Boley v. Carolyn W. Colvin, acting commissioner of Social Security
13-1252
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division. Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Vacates District Court’s dismissal of Boley’s petition for judicial review of the decision by an administrative law judge that denied her request for a hearing on the denial of benefits. Remands with instructions to decide whether substantial evidence and appropriate procedures underlie the decision that she lacks “good cause” for her delay in seeking intra-agency review. Overrules Watters v. Harris, 656 F. 2d 234 (7th Cir. 1980).
More

Opinions Aug. 4, 2014

August 4, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Bruce Carneil Webster v. John F. Caraway, Warden, United States Penitentiary, Terre Haute
14-1049
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division. Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms dismissal of Webster’s petition for collateral relief under 28 U.S.C. Section 2241. Agrees with District Court’s decision that the petition is blocked by Section 2255(e), under which Webster had previously sought collateral relief in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the circuit where he had committed his crime.

Indiana Court of Appeals
More

Opinions Aug. 1, 2014

August 1, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Constantino Cejas and Nicholas Ceja
12-3896 & 13-1034
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge Jane E. Magnus-Stinson
Criminal. Affirms brothers’ convictions for conspiring to distribute drugs, possessing and distributing 50 grams or more of methamphetamine and possessing a firearm to further their drug activity. Also affirms Constantino’s sentence of 480 months imprisonment. Rules the video taken outside the home where the drug deal occurred was properly authenticated and was not barred by Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Finds there was sufficient evidence to convict Nicholas for possession with intent to distribute and distribution of methamphetamine. Finally, concludes Constantino’s second firearm possession conviction did not violate double jeopardy and congressional intent.
More

Opinions July 31, 2014

July 31, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
William T. Calvert v. State of Indiana
32A01-1312-CR-535
Criminal. Reversed conviction of illegal consumption of alcohol by a minor, a Class C misdemeanor. Rules the trial court should have granted a continuance rather than try Calvert in absentia. Calvert, a private in the U.S. Army, was denied his constitutional right to be present at his trial because he was on deployment in Afghanistan when his hearing was held. Remands for a new trial.
More

Opinions July 30, 2014

July 30, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Bartholomew County, Indiana v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development, and Robert L. Amos
93A02-1311-EX-986
Agency action. Affirms administrative law judge’s determination that Robert Amos was entitled to unemployment benefits after he was discharged for playfully shooting another participant with a nonlethal bullet after a training exercise. The review board did not err in finding that the merit board unevenly applied rules to the class of other officers who had playfully shot others in training exercises, Amos was not collaterally estopped from contesting the merit board determination that he was fired for cause, and the administrative law judge did not abuse discretion by denying the county’s request to submit the transcript of the merit board hearing as additional evidence.
More

Opinions July 29, 2014

July 29, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Ryan E. Bean v. State of Indiana
91A02-1310-CR-912
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A felony child molesting. Finds Bean was denied a fair trial because of fundamental error. Testimony from the victim’s mother and an Indiana Department of Child Services investigator impermissibly vouched for the victim’s credibility and invaded the province of the jury to determine the validity of the witness’s statements. The prosecutor reinforced this vouching testimony in his closing arguments. Also, the prosecutor committed misconduct when he asked the county sheriff about the process for investigating child molesting allegations in general. The sheriff’s testimony left the jurors wondering what Bean told police and, therefore, penalized the defendant for invoking his right to counsel.
More

Opinions July 28, 2014

July 28, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Bobby Alexander v. State of Indiana
49A04-1207-CR-351
Criminal. Reverse one of two convictions for Class B felony aggravated battery. Rules the state incorrectly asserted in the charging information and during closing arguments that Alexander’s actions of shooting at a car created a substantial risk of death. Remands with instructions to enter judgment of conviction for battery as a Class C felony and to resentence accordingly.
More

Opinions July 25, 2014

July 25, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Chris T. Collins v. State of Indiana
49A02-1310-PC-887
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief, concluding that the post-conviction court’s denial of Collins’ request of subpoenas was not an abuse of discretion and that denial of his petition was proper.
More

Opinions July 24, 2014

July 24, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Larry A. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1312-CR-627
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.
More

Opinions July 23, 2014

July 23, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Willie L. Montgomery v. State of Indiana
82A05-1401-CR-34
Criminal. On interlocutory appeal, rejects Montgomery’s challenge of the denial of his motion to dismiss a charge of failure to register as a sex or violent offender in Vanderburgh County because he has already been prosecuted for failing to register in Pike County. The charge in question is not barred under I.C. 35-34-1-4(a)(7) and does not violate double jeopardy principles. Remands for trial.
More

Opinions July 22, 2014

July 22, 2014
Indiana Supreme Court
Kenyatta Erkins v. State of Indiana
58S01-1309-CR-586
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony conspiracy to commit robbery resulting in serious bodily injury. Presents first impression issue of whether the state must establish the existence of serious bodily injury for Erkins’ conviction to stand. Because conspiracy is a crime consisting of intent to commit an underlying crime, an agreement between or among conspirators to commit the underlying crime, and an overt act by one of the conspirators in furtherance of the agreement, the state needed only to prove these elements beyond a reasonable doubt to support his conviction. Justice Rucker concurs in part and dissents in part to which Chief Justice Dickson joins.
More

Opinions July 21, 2014

July 21, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Donella Locke
11-3743
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Criminal. Affirms Locke’s sentence of 57 months in prison, three years of supervised release and order she pay more than $340,000 in restitution to lenders for her role in a real estate fraud scheme. Locke argued the District Court erred when it failed to reduce the loss amount incurred as a result of her convicted conduct by the amounts the victims received when they sold the real estate that secured the fraudulently obtained loans, but she waived this issue.
More

Opinions July 18, 2014

July 18, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
In re: The Visitation of A.W., J.W. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1401-MI-3
Miscellaneous. Dismisses denial of mother’s motion to correct error.
More

Opinions July 17, 2014

July 17, 2014
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday:
United States of America v. Lorenzo Mosley
13-3184
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge James T. Moody.
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Mosley’s supervised release after judge found Mosley had committed the alleged violations, which included dealing cocaine, and sentence to 21 months in prison. The District Court erred in admitting a hearsay statement without finding there was “good cause,” but the error was harmless.
More

Opinions July 16, 2014

July 16, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Martin J. Jonassen
13-1410
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge James T. Mood.
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for kidnapping and obstruction of justice. The District Court properly declined to conduct a competency hearing. Although Jonassen asserted bizarre legal theories based on his claim of “sovereign citizenship,” that alone does not provide a reason to doubt his competence to stand trial, and the record does not otherwise suggest that he lacked the ability to understand the proceedings. The court’s evidentiary ruling was also sound. The government laid an ample foundation for admission of the hearsay statements under Rule 804(b)(6); the evidence established that Jonassen used bribery, guilt and various forms of psychological intimidation to procure his daughter’s unavailability. Finally, because he did not request Jencks Act material before the close of trial, his claim for relief under the Act necessarily fails.
More

Opinions July 15, 2014

July 15, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Antonio L. Vaughn v. State of Indiana
84A01-1302-CR-57
Criminal. Affirmed Vaughn’s conviction and 40-year aggregate sentence for two counts of dealing in cocaine, each as a Class A felony, and one count of maintaining a common nuisance, a Class D felony. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of the controlled buys, statements of the confidential information and the cocaine. Also finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in instructing the jury. Rules the evidence was sufficient to support Vaughn’s convictions. Holds the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it sentenced Vaughn but it made a clerical error on the sentencing order. Remanded to the trial court to correct error to reflect that Vaughn was sentenced for maintaining a common nuisance conviction to three years, not three-and-a-half years.
More

Opinions July 14, 2014

July 14, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Center for Inquiry, Inc., and Reba Boyd Wooden v. Marion Circuit Court Clerk and Marion County Prosecutor
12-3751
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Reverses the denial of an injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the marriage solemnization statute. Rules Indiana’s statute that prohibits officials of secular groups such as humanist societies from solemnizing marriages violates the First Amendment and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
More

Opinions July 11, 2014

July 11, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Scott A. Wright v. State of Indiana
45A05-1310-CR-526
Criminal. Vacates Wright’s conviction of Class A felony child molesting and remands for a new trial. Finds the trial court erred in replacing a juror during deliberations. The juror was the lone vote to acquit and had stopped deliberating but he was not prejudicing the other jurors nor impairing Wright’s right to a trial by jury. Moreover, the trial court failed to explain to the jury that the removal of the single juror was not because the court agreed or disagreed with the juror’s views.
More

Opinions July 10, 2014

July 10, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Adam Hartman v. EBSCO Industries Inc., et al
13-3398
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of defendants on Hartman’s lawsuit alleging negligence and strict liability after he was injured accidently by a gun. Indiana has a 10-year statute of repose for products-liability actions and his gun was then 14 years old. There are two exceptions to the statute, but he cannot satisfy either one.
More

Opinions June 9, 2014

July 9, 2014
Indiana Supreme Court
Veolia Water Indianapolis, LLC, City of Indianapolis, Department of Waterworks, and City of Indianapolis v. National Trust Insurance Company and FCCI Insurance Company a/s/o Ultra Steak, Inc., et al.
49S04-1301-PL-8
Civil plenary. Grants petition for rehearing on the issue of whether the insurers are third-party beneficiaries to the management agreement between Veolia and the city of Indianapolis. As to all issues not expressly addressed in the principal opinion, the Court of Appeals is summarily affirmed.
More

Opinions July 8, 2014

July 8, 2014
The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Monday:
Julia Hutt v. AbbVie Products LLC
13-1481
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Judge Joseph S. Van Bokkelen.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment in favor of AbbVie Products, formerly known as Solvay Pharmaceuticals, on Hutt’s age discrimination and retaliation claims and her state law claim asserting a violation of the Indiana Wage Payment Statute. The District Court correctly concluded that Hutt’s age discrimination claim fails under the direct method and she could not prove the company retaliated against her for filing a complaint with the EEOC. Finds Hutt failed to develop her bad-faith argument with regard to her claim alleging violation of the Wage Payment Statute.
More

Opinions July 7, 2014

July 7, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
Z.A. v. State of Indiana
49A02-1311-JV-973
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication that Z.A. committed what would be Class D felony theft if committed by an adult. The state did not prove that Z.A. exerted unauthorized control over the television he and his mother purchased together when he took it from his mother’s home over her objection.
More

Opinions July 3, 2014

July 3, 2014
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Gene Williams on behalf of Pamela J. Townsend v. Carolyn W. Colvin, acting commissioner of Social Security
13-3607
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division, Magistrate Judge John E. Martin.
Civil. Reverses District Court’s affirmation of the administrative law judge’s decision that Townsend became totally disabled as of Nov. 1, 2008.
More

Opinions July 2, 2014

July 2, 2014
Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of: Steve L. Brejensky
29S00-1205-DI-277
Discipline. Imposes at least one-year suspension without automatic reinstatement based on Brejensky’s conviction of Class A misdemeanor conversion and lack of remorse. He may be reinstated only after proving his remorse, rehabilitation and fitness to practice law. The costs of the proceeding are assessed against him.
More

Opinions July 1, 2014

July 1, 2014
Indiana Court of Appeals
James Brown v. State of Indiana

49A02-1312-CR-1023
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor public intoxication, holding that Brown was intoxicated in a public place and the evidence was sufficient to prove he harassed, annoyed or alarmed another person, one of the four conduct elements under the statute amended in 2012.
More
Page  << 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  2. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  3. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  4. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  5. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

ADVERTISEMENT