ILNews

Opinions April 10, 2014

April 10, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
HRC Hotels, LLC v. Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals Division II of Marion County, Indiana, Jeffrey R. Baumgarth and The Myers Y. Cooper Company
49A04-1307-PL-313
Civil plenary. Reverses dismissal of HRC Hotels’ amended petition for judicial review, which substituted I-465 LLC as the real party in interest instead of HRC Hotels. The standing requirements under I.C. 36-7-4-1603 are procedural rather than jurisdictional, so HRC Hotels’ alleged lack of standing when the petition was filed does not deprive the trial court of subject-matter jurisdiction. It should substitute I-465 LLC as a real party in interest and hear the merits of the petition for judicial review. Remands for further proceedings.

Michael Johnson v. State of Indiana
49A02-1307-CR-562
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement, Class B felony rape, Class C felony battery, Class D felonies intimidation and strangulation, and Class A misdemeanor interfering with the reporting of a crime. Johnson knowing, voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial on all of his charges, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying him the right to cross-examine the victim about past sexual conduct, and the state presented sufficient evidence to prove Johnson committed Class B felony rape and Class D felony intimidation. Judge Bradford concurs in result.

Monterius D. Sharp v. State of Indiana (NFP)
05A02-1306-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class C felony escape, Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun and three counts of Class D felony intimidation.

Dawayne J. Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1309-CR-452
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

John Orville Study v. State of Indiana (NFP)
06A04-1308-CR-391
Criminal. Affirms convictions of four counts of Class B felony robbery, six counts of Class B felony criminal confinement, one count of Class D felony resisting law enforcement, one count of Class D felony pointing a firearm and one count of Class D felony auto theft.

Adam W. Powell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
38A02-1304-IF-316
Infraction. Affirms finding Powell committed Class A infraction operating a motor vehicle without financial responsibility, Class A infraction driving while suspended, Class C infraction failure to register and Class C infraction window tint in violation by a driver.

Jamie L. Strickler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1308-CR-707
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to three counts of Class B felony dealing in a controlled substance under two different cause numbers.  

Richard Brown and Janet Brown v. City of Valparaiso, Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1308-PL-332
Civil plenary. Affirms order denying the Browns’ inverse condemnation claim on the merits.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT