Criminal case
7th Circuit rules on sex offender registration
December 22, 2008
Michael HoskinsA reasonable grace period is required before the federal government can enhance a convicted sex offender's punishment for
not registering after a move to a new state, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today.
MoreCOA: Warrant didn't need to be admitted
December 22, 2008
Rebecca BerfangerIn a case of first impression involving whether an active arrest warrant must be admitted into evidence when the defendant
has not challenged the warrant's validity, the Court of Appeals has affirmed an appellant-defendant's conviction of
Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana that an officer discovered during a routine traffic stop.
MoreMen took substantial steps to commit crime
December 18, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the same issue in two separate Indiana cases of men chatting on the Internet with
people they believed to be teen girls: whether there was evidence the men had taken "substantial steps" toward committing
the crimes of enticing a minor to engage in criminal sexual activity.
MoreJudges disagree on public intox conviction
December 5, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals reversed a woman's conviction of public intoxication, but the judge dissenting in the case
believed the majority reweighed the credibility of the witnesses and their testimony to reach their decision.
MoreMan can't collaterally attack sentence again
December 4, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has again denied a man's attempt to have his drug conviction overturned or sentence reduced
because he had used the one 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 motion he was allowed and he can't challenge his sentence again under
the same section.
More7th Circuit cautions about propensity inference
November 20, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals today affirmed a man's drug convictions with intent to distribute, but questioned how
a previous drug conviction showed the man had intent or absence of mistake in the instant case.
MoreCourt orders re-trial after jury instruction error
November 13, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals has ordered a re-trial for a man convicted of attempted murder after ruling today the trial court
failed to properly instruct the jury on accomplice liability.
MoreCOA affirms sexually violent predator findings
October 28, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the finding that two defendants are sexually violent predators, ruling the state had
produced sufficient evidence to support the determinations under the versions of the sexually violent predator statute used
by the trial courts in each case.
MoreCOA revises child molesting sentence
October 23, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals upheld a man's convictions of child molesting, but reduced his sentence because he can't
be considered among the worst offenders to justify the maximum sentence.
MoreCOA: Collateral estoppel not applicable
October 2, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of a motion to suppress evidence because the defendant couldn't prove
collateral estoppel precluded the trial court from denying his motion.
MoreConvictions don't violate double jeopardy
September 3, 2008
Jennifer NelsonThe Indiana Supreme Court affirmed today a post-conviction court's denial of a defendant's petition for relief, finding
his convictions of burglary and attempted armed robbery didn't violate Indiana's double jeopardy clause.
More7th Circuit panel opines practical tips
April 4, 2008
Michael HoskinsThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has some practical advice for criminal law attorneys who go before federal judges: have handy
a copy of federal criminal procedure rules, particularly those involving plea discussions at sentencing, and don't be afraid
to correct or point out omissions to a judge.
More7th Circuit rules on multiplicitous convictions
November 21, 2007
Jennifer NelsonThe 7th Circuit Court of Appeals encountered for the first time the issue of whether a single incident of firearm possession
can support multiple convictions under United States Code when the defendant is included in more than one class of people
who are disqualified under the statute from possessing firearms.
More
Sponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.
Forcing a defendant to wear a stun belt, in court or otherwise, is a violation of american principles! It is also unconstitutional!
So, if I save $100.00 cash per week, from my $500.00 per week paycheck, for 50 years, at which time, I will have saved $260,000.00, the government can raid my home and take my money, just by saying it is drug money! Shouldn't the government, have some kind of evidence of drugs, rather, than just saying we are the government and we will take anything you own, anytime we choose? Tyranny is upon us! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any!