ILNews

Opinions Aug. 22, 2012

August 22, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Ashley T. Tucker v. Michelle R. Harrison, M.D.
79A05-1108-CT-404
Civil tort. Affirms judgment in favor of Dr. Harrison on Tucker’s medical malpractice complaint. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding Tucker’s expert testimony, limiting her questioning of a witness about possible bias, or in instructing the jury.

Ryan E. Bean v. State of Indiana
91A02-1109-CR-906
Criminal. Reverses two convictions of Class A felony child molesting and remands for retrials if the state so chooses. Concludes Bean was in custody when he finally admitted to the molestation. Bean’s confession was obtained in violation of Miranda protocol and shouldn’t have been admitted into evidence in his trials in Carroll and White counties.  

Jorge Henriquez v. State of Indiana
49A02-1201-CR-6
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony resisting law enforcement. The trial court did not err in not interrogating the jurors or taking other remedial action regarding alleged improper influence of an alternate juror, so Henriquez’s claim of fundamental error fails.

Gregory L. Brown v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, and H & H Mechanical of Michiana LLC (NFP)
93A02-1202-EX-133
Agency action. Affirms denial of unemployment benefits.

Dennis Ogutu v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1202-CR-98
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor neglect of a dependent.
 
In Re: The Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: C.H. and G.H., and G.H. and J.H. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1112-JT-1203
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

In the Matter of T.B., A Child Alleged to be a Delinquent Child v. State of Indiana (NFP)
65A04-1203-JV-146
Juvenile. Affirms order requiring T.B. register as a sex offender.

Tacuma G. Wolfe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A05-1111-CR-604
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Kenneth W. Wegener v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A05-1202-PC-47
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Steven D. Powell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1201-CR-2
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony dealing in cocaine and Class C felony attempted battery.

Michael A. Ayers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1201-CR-52
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted murder.

Ivan Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1201-CR-24
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.
 

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. I can understand a 10 yr suspension for drinking and driving and not following the rules,but don't you think the people who compleate their sentences and are trying to be good people of their community,and are on the right path should be able to obtain a drivers license to do as they please.We as a state should encourage good behavior instead of saying well you did all your time but we can't give you a license come on.When is a persons time served than cause from where I'm standing,its still a punishment,when u can't have the freedom to go where ever you want to in car,truck ,motorcycle,maybe their should be better programs for people instead of just throwing them away like daily trash,then expecting them to change because they we in jail or prison for x amount of yrs.Everyone should look around because we all pay each others bills,and keep each other in business..better knowledge equals better community equals better people...just my 2 cents

  2. I was wondering about the 6 million put aside for common attorney fees?does that mean that if you are a plaintiff your attorney fees will be partially covered?

  3. I expressed my thought in the title, long as it was. I am shocked that there is ever immunity from accountability for ANY Government agency. That appears to violate every principle in the US Constitution, which exists to limit Government power and to ensure Government accountability. I don't know how many cases of legitimate child abuse exist, but in the few cases in which I knew the people involved, in every example an anonymous caller used DCS as their personal weapon to strike at innocent people over trivial disagreements that had no connection with any facts. Given that the system is vulnerable to abuse, and given the extreme harm any action by DCS causes to families, I would assume any degree of failure to comply with the smallest infraction of personal rights would result in mandatory review. Even one day of parent-child separation in the absence of reasonable cause for a felony arrest should result in severe penalties to those involved in the action. It appears to me, that like all bureaucracies, DCS is prone to interpret every case as legitimate. This is not an accusation against DCS. It is a statement about the nature of bureaucracies, and the need for ADDED scrutiny of all bureaucratic actions. Frankly, I question the constitutionality of bureaucracies in general, because their power is delegated, and therefore unaccountable. No Government action can be unaccountable if we want to avoid its eventual degeneration into irrelevance and lawlessness, and the law of the jungle. Our Constitution is the source of all Government power, and it is the contract that legitimizes all Government power. To the extent that its various protections against intrusion are set aside, so is the power afforded by that contract. Eventually overstepping the limits of power eliminates that power, as a law of nature. Even total tyranny eventually crumbles to nothing.

  4. Being dedicated to a genre keeps it alive until the masses catch up to the "trend." Kent and Bill are keepin' it LIVE!! Thank you gentlemen..you know your JAZZ.

  5. Hemp has very little THC which is needed to kill cancer cells! Growing cannabis plants for THC inside a hemp field will not work...where is the fear? From not really knowing about Cannabis and Hemp or just not listening to the people teaching you through testimonies and packets of info over the last few years! Wake up Hoosier law makers!

ADVERTISEMENT