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

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT