ILNews

Opinions April 7, 2011

April 7, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Jeffrey P. Taylor
10-2715
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge James T. Moody.
Criminal. Reverses conviction of and 10-year sentence for violating 18 U.S.C. Section 2422(b), which deals with knowingly persuading or enticing someone under 18 to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so. The section is ambiguous and sexual activity and sexual act could be synonyms and therefore require contact between the perpetrator and victim for a conviction. Remands with instructions to acquit Taylor. Judge Manion concurs in a separate opinion.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Carol Cutter, et al. v. Geneva Herbst, personal representative of the Estate of Jeffry A. Herbst, deceased
49A04-1006-PL-343
Civil plenary. Affirms order on Herbst’s motion to correct errors, awarding the estate $750,000 in damages following a calculation of pre-negligence and post-negligence survival chances. The estate did not waive the pre-negligence versus post-negligence survival argument. The evidence shows that Jeffry’s primary care physician’s and the hospital’s medical negligence significantly decreased his chances for survival. Affirms trial court determination that Jeffry’s post-negligence chance of survival was 10 percent, not 0 percent as the estate argued. Chief Judge Robb dissents.

Stephen Harvey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A03-1008-PC-469
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Brian Redd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1010-CR-533
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting.

Michael L. Yates v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1010-CR-606
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony attempted armed robbery.

Joseph Munden v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1009-CR-534
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license.

Jacob M. Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-959
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

  2. Mr. Straw, I hope you prevail in the fight. Please show us fellow American's that there is a way to fight the corrupted justice system and make them an example that you and others will not be treated unfairly. I hope you the best and good luck....

  3. @ President Snow - Nah, why try to fix something that ain't broken??? You do make an excellent point. I am sure some Mickey or Minnie Mouse will take Ruckers seat, I wonder how his retirement planning is coming along???

  4. Can someone please explain why Judge Barnes, Judge Mathias and Chief Judge Vaidik thought it was OK to re weigh the evidence blatantly knowing that by doing so was against the rules and went ahead and voted in favor of the father? I would love to ask them WHY??? I would also like to ask the three Supreme Justices why they thought it was OK too.

  5. How nice, on the day of my car accident on the way to work at the Indiana Supreme Court. Unlike the others, I did not steal any money or do ANYTHING unethical whatsoever. I am suing the Indiana Supreme Court and appealed the failure of the district court in SDIN to protect me. I am suing the federal judge because she failed to protect me and her abandonment of jurisdiction leaves her open to lawsuits because she stripped herself of immunity. I am a candidate for Indiana Supreme Court justice, and they imposed just enough sanction so that I am made ineligible. I am asking the 7th Circuit to remove all of them and appoint me as the new Chief Justice of Indiana. That's what they get for dishonoring my sacrifice and and violating the ADA in about 50 different ways.

ADVERTISEMENT