ILNews

Opinions April 30, 2012

April 30, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

D.A. v. State of Indiana
49A02-1108-JV-692
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s decision to order inpatient treatment for D.A. who entered into a plea agreement admitting to Class B misdemeanor battery if committed by an adult and “conditionally” agreed to admit to Class C felony child molesting, if committed by an adult. D.A.’s placement is consistent with the goals for his rehabilitation. The appellate judges do not have jurisdiction to resolve the issue of whether the trial court erred in accepting his conditional plea to the child molesting charge because there was no evidence of D.A.’s intent with regard to the molesting. The conditional plea is the equivalent to a withheld judgment so there is no final judgment or appealable final order from which to appeal.

Daniel P. Millikan v. Lori A. Eifrid
92A03-1109-PL-433
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court properly determined that Eifrid was the bona fide and innocent purchaser for value of a parcel of property when applying the doctrine of equitable subrogation. The trial court erred in ordering Millikan to pay Eifrid’s attorney fees because the court didn’t determine that Millikan had committed fraud that would entitle Eifried to recover those fees. Remands with instructions to vacate the award of attorney fees.

Dontevius Hutcherson v. State of Indiana
45A03-1109-CR-420
Criminal. Affirms convictions, including murder, attempted murder and robbery. Finds Hutcherson was afforded the opportunity to meet and question Lee face-to-face and therefore was not deprived of his right of confrontation under the state or federal constitutions. Due to the cumulative nature of evidence contained in Victor Lee’s prior statement, Hutcherson was not prejudiced when it was read aloud to the jury because Lee was illiterate.

Jason Jeffries v. State of Indiana
87A01-1102-CR-128
Criminal. Affirms the trial court properly denied Jeffries’ motion to set aside his guilty plea. The confusion regarding application of the habitual offender count to one cause and not the other does not rise to the level of a manifest injustice. His ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim also fails.

Walter B. Duncan v. The Greater Brownsburg Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
32A01-1109-CC-429
Civil collection. Reverses denial of the chamber’s motion for summary judgment on Duncan’s breach of contract claim and remands with instructions. The most Duncan was entitled to in the event of a breach of contract by the chamber of the notice requirement was 30 days compensation, and the designated evidence does not create a genuine question regarding damages. Adopts the majority rule that “the summary discharge of an employee entitled under the employment contract to a specified period of notice ordinarily permits him to recover his compensation for the notice period only and not for the entire balance of the contract period.”

Jasper A. Wisdom v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1108-CR-380
Criminal. Remands for an inquiry into Wisdom’s ability to pay the $1,600 in restitution and, if appropriate, for adjustment of the restitution amount based on that factor.

State of Indiana v. Blake Lodde (NFP)
79A02-1111-CR-1067
Criminal. Reverses order granting Lodde’s motion to suppress evidence gathered during and after an investigatory stop of his vehicle. Remands with instructions.

Louis Amalfitano v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1108-CR-446
Criminal. Affirms convictions, including Class B felony criminal confinement, Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury, and Class D felony exploitation of an endangered adult.

Brett A. Head-Mattingly v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A05-1103-CR-127
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felonies attempted burglary and burglary, and Class D felony theft.

Michael E. Kirk v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1111-PC-609
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Nancy A. Regula, as Administrator of the Estate of Daniel G. Young, Deceased v. HPG Corp., doing business as Cohen Brothers Metals Co. and Integrity Metals (NFP)
89A01-1109-CT-402
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of HPG Corp. on a negligence claim.

J.M. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1109-JV-817
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for what would be Class B felony child molesting if committed by an adult.

C.F. v. M.R. (NFP)
30A01-1110-DR-467
Domestic relation. Affirms order granting M.R.’s motion to modify custody.

Rodney D. Craft v. State of Indiana (NFP)
66A03-1104-CR-145
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies possession of reagents and precursors with intent to manufacture a controlled substance, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of cocaine.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT