ILNews

New IPAC leader named

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Longtime prosecutor David N. Powell from Greene County is the newest leader of the Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys Council.

The IPAC governing board announced the selection late Wednesday, culminating a search process that’s been ongoing for about three months since longtime executive director Stephen J. Johnson announced he was stepping down effective Aug. 1.

Powell was one of about 20 people who’d applied for the post and since early July a four-person search committee – made up of Elkhart County Prosecutor Curtis Hill, Floyd County Prosecutor Keith Henderson, Dearborn-Ohio County Prosecutor Aaron Negangard, and Grant County Prosecutor Jim Luttrull Jr. – has been reviewing applicants.

An Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis graduate admitted to practice in 1981, Powell has three decades of experience in matters ranging from civil law, prosecuting attorney issues on the criminal side, and a long career as a military lawyer.

He’ll lead the state agency and represent Indiana’s 91 prosecutors before the Legislature, as well as act as a liaison to the governor’s office, law enforcement agencies, and various boards and organizations. He begins immediately, but will ease into the new position as he winds up his legal work that includes serving as special prosecutor in a number of criminal cases statewide.

He’s served as a part-time senior prosecutor in 16 counties throughout Central Indiana since 2007, when he chose to not seek a sixth term as Greene County prosecutor. Powell served as an elected prosecutor since 1987, working a decade part-time and a decade full-time. That allowed him to also practice part-time as a civil attorney in Worthington, handling business, real estate, municipal, school, and personal injury issues.

During his time as prosecutor, Powell served two years on the Indiana General Assembly’s Probation Service Study Commission and he’d also served on the U.S. Attorney’s Anti-Terrorism Task Force.

A retired colonel for the U.S. Air Force, Powell has been a state judge advocate for air since 1998, which put him in the role of a senior legal advisor for military affairs for Indiana. He’d served as a judge advocate since the early-1980s, as supervising attorney and legal advisor handling more than 40 felony trials through the years.

Outside of his legal career, Powell has also spent his time operating a 700-acre family farm and beef herd in south-central Indiana.

A joint statement by IPAC board chairman Todd Meyer, Boone County prosecutor, and Luttrull from Grant County who serves as president of the Association of Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys, said the two organizations have confidence that Powell will be able to successfully pick up the role that Johnson had held before retiring and becoming a consultant.

Powell will also serve as executive secretary for the association, which is a separate entity and is able to operate in lobbying areas that IPAC by law cannot, since the latter is a state-funded agency. The second-in-command at IPAC, Suzanne O’Malley – who has been serving as interim director since Johnson’s retiremen – will continue handling the daily operations during Powell’s transition period.

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. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  2. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  5. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

ADVERTISEMENT