ILNews

Opinions Aug. 15, 2011

August 15, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
T.W. v. State of Indiana
54A01-1103-JV-125
Juvenile. Affirms order that T.W. must register as a sex offender for 10 years. In the absence of any constitutional constraints, it was entirely the General Assembly’s prerogative to grant Indiana courts the subject matter jurisdiction to enter orders requiring certain juveniles to register as sex offenders. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling T.W.’s objections to the testimony of two court-appointed psychologists.

Jimmy Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1101-CR-57
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

J.B. Whitelow v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1009-CR-586
Criminal. Affirms convictions of felony murder, Class C felony attempted battery, and adjudication as an habitual offender.

The Education Resources Institute v. Douglas L. Krasnoff (NFP)
49A02-1007-CC-899
Civil collections. Reverses dismissal of The Education Resources Institute’s suit against Krasnoff. Remands for a new trial.

Lee Tibbetts v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1010-CR-609
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for four counts of Class A felony child molesting, two counts of Class C felony child molesting, and one count of Class D felony vicarious sexual gratification.

Cesar Sanchez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
06A01-1103-CR-111
Criminal. Reverses sentence for Class C felony operating a vehicle after forfeiture of license for life and Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Remands with instructions to issue a revised sentence as detailed in the opinion. Judge Bradford dissents.

Leonard E. Luna v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-1103-CR-114
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony intimidation.

J.F. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A04-1103-JV-149
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a juvenile delinquent for committing what would be criminal recklessness if committed by an adult.


Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court did not grant or deny transfer to any cases for the week ending Aug. 12.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  2. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  3. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  4. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

ADVERTISEMENT