ILNews

Lawmakers vote on COA panel, Lake County fee

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Both houses of the Indiana General Assembly took action on court-related legislation Thursday.

The Senate moved forward with Senate Bill 35, authored by Sen. Richard Bray, R-Martinsville, that would create a sixth Indiana Court of Appeals panel. No amendments were offered on the second reading Thursday, and it's expected to get a final third reading for adoption next week. If approved, this would be the first expansion since 1991 and would bump the number of intermediate appellate judges from 15 to 18 starting in January 2010.

Despite doubt that the bill would get enough support this session because of tough economic times and difficult budget balancing, the legislation that carries an estimated price tag of $1.3 in its first year and $2.2 million afterward is moving swiftly so far. SB 35 received unanimous consent from both the Senate's judiciary and appropriations committees.

If approved by the full Senate before its deadline to do so next week, the bill would move to the House of Representatives for consideration before the session concludes in late April.

Meanwhile, the House passed a bill that would add a $10 fee onto Lake County court cases to pay for the eventual construction of a centralized judicial center.

Lawmakers voted 53-41 in favor of House Bill 1435, authored by Rep. Linda Lawson, D-Hammond, which would establish a fund aimed at financing, constructing, and equipping a new facility in or near Crown Point. The fund for a consolidated judicial center comes on the heels of a 2007 study recommending many ways that the local government could be more efficient, including the idea of centralizing into one location.

If enacted, a $10 fee would be charged on any civil filing in Lake's Circuit or Superior courts, and in criminal cases where someone is convicted of an offense, required to pay a pretrial diversion fee, or found to have committed an infraction or ordinance violation.

With more than 100,000 cases filed in Lake County, this $10 fee could bring in an estimated $800,000 a year.

Rep. Charlie Brown, D-Gary, objected to the bill and said a centralized judicial center would disenfranchise residents far from Crown Point, particularly lower-income residents without adequate transportation options. Lawson told him that the city courts in Gary and Hammond would remain open, but Brown wasn't satisfied and voted against the proposal.

The measure now moves to the Senate for consideration.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT