ILNews

Masters appointed in cases of 2 judges

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has appointed masters to the disciplinary cases of Bicknell City Court Judge David A. Moreland and LaPorte Superior Judge Jennifer Evans Koethe.

Morgan Superior Judge Christopher L. Burnham, Monroe Circuit Judge Mary Ellen Diekhoff, and Hamilton Circuit Judge Paul A. Felix will serve as masters in the Bicknell city judge's case. Judge Burnham will serve as the presiding judge.

Judge Moreland is charged with five counts of Class D felony theft stemming from an audit by the state in August 2009. He's accused of stealing nearly $21,000 since he became City Court judge in 2008. He was suspended with pay by the high court in October and faces five counts of misconduct filed by the Indiana Commission Judicial Qualifications. Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller filed a civil suit in December to prevent Judge Moreland from transferring, selling, or otherwise disposing of financial assets that the state might seek for recovery.

Tippecanoe Superior Judge Thomas H. Busch, Lake Superior Judge Diane Ross Boswell, and Noble Superior Judge Michael J. Kramer will serve as masters in Judge Koethe's case. Judge Busch will serve as the presiding judge.

Judge Koethe was recently acquitted of Class D felony attempted obstruction of justice stemming from an incident in which she was shot in her home just before taking the bench.

At the time of the incident, there were discrepancies between Judge Koethe and her husband as to how the judge was shot. She also told a detective she wrote a note to her husband and asked him to get rid of it. That request led to the grand jury indictment of Judge Koethe for attempted obstruction of justice.

Judge Koethe faces three counts of violating the Judicial Code of Conduct and the Rules of Professional Conduct. She has been suspended with pay since May.

The masters' reports in both cases should reach the Supreme Court justices by June 9, 2010, according to the orders.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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.

  2. 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?

  3. 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

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT