ILNews

Opinions April 20, 2011

April 20, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ricky E. Graham v. State of Indiana
22A01-1008-PC-392
Post conviction. Grants rehearing to clarify comments made regarding the creation and preservation of evidentiary records in post-conviction relief proceedings and affirms original opinion in all respects.

Roland Ball v. State of Indiana
06A01-1007-CR-426
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony sexual battery because there is insufficient evidence of sexual battery, but sufficient evidence of the lesser-included offense of battery. The state failed to prove the element of mental disability or deficiency beyond a reasonable doubt and being asleep does not constitute being mentally disabled or deficient under the statute. Remands to enter judgment for battery as a Class B misdemeanor.

The Adoption of R.S.T.; J.T. v. G.N. (NFP)
71A03-1008-AD-475
Adoption. Affirms order granting stepfather G.N.’s petition for adoption of R.S.T.

Edward P. Barsh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1009-CR-1047
Criminal. Affirms revocation of home detention.

LaTrice L. King v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1007-CR-560
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony criminal confinement.

James Lee-Vaughn White, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1009-CR-586
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Loren Sallee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
31A01-1008-CR-399
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery, Class D felony domestic battery, and Class A misdemeanor interference with reporting of a crime.

Luis Briones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1009-CR-450
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder, Class C felony criminal recklessness and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

L.R. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1009-EX-1010
Civil. Affirms decision of the review board concluding that L.R. is disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he was discharged for just cause.

Jason Morales v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1005-CR-311
Criminal. Affirms three convictions of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Andrew S. Dugger v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-1008-CR-562
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for Class B felony possession of a dangerous device or material by a prisoner and Class C felony battery.

Napoleon Camarillo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-1009-CR-553
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Carl Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1007-CR-448
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony robbery, Class C felony intimidation, and Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Woody E. Sinclair v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1008-CR-443
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class C felony burglary.

Stroh Landmark, LP, et al. v. Willis Hecht (NFP)
17A03-1011-PL-631
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) motion to set aside default judgment on a real estate transaction issue. Remands for further proceedings.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of C.S., et al; K.L. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
57A03-1009-JT-464
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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