ILNews

Opinions Aug. 19, 2014

August 19, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Monday:
United States of America v. Kenneth Jones, Ramone Mockabee, Devon Young and Elisha Drake
11-2267, 11-2288, 11-2535, 11-2687
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Affirms cocaine distribution and other drug convictions of Jones, Drake and Young after a jury trial, but vacates the sentences of Mockabee, who pleaded guilty, Jones and Drake and remands their cases for resentencing.  The trial court did not err in denying Jones’ motion to suppress evidence found at his house after a search warrant was executed. There is sufficient evidence to support their convictions, but there are sentencing errors related to Mockabee, Jones and Drake.

United States of America v. Juan Carlos Adame-Hernandez
12-1268
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Vacates Adame-Hernandez’s conviction and 300-month sentence under a second guilty plea for criminal drug conspiracy and remands with instructions to allow him to maintain his original guilty plea and be sentenced under the parties’ written plea agreement executed Jan. 3, 2011. Circuit Rule 36 applies on remand. The District Court did not follow the procedures under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of the Adoption of M.H., W.M. & S.K. v. N.B. & R.B.
82A01-1310-AD-449
Adoption.  Affirms order denying W.M. and S.K.’s petition for adoption of M.H. and granting the petition of adoption filed by R.B. and N.B. The appellants did not overcome the presumption that the judge acted impartially when he ruled in favor of N.B. and R.B. The judge received an email from a former fraternity brother in favor of the adoptive family, but he refused to recuse himself in the case because he said he would not consider the person’s argument, stopped reading the email quickly, and had not recently socialized or interacted with the fraternity brother. Finds evidence supports adoption by N.B. and R.B. in the best interests of the child.

Lisa B. Gonzalez v. R. Stanton Evans
29A02-1311-DR-984
Domestic relation.  Reverses award of $8,289.33 in attorney fees to Evans. The attorney fees awarded to Evans exceeds the bounds of what is contemplated by Trial Rule 34(C)(3.) There was no reasonable resistance related to Gonzalez’s subpoena by Evans and he was not entitled to any attorney fees related to such resistance. Remands for a determination of how much Evans actually incurred in relation to his compliance with the subpoena, excluding such fees related to his months-long effort to avoid providing the documents to Gonzalez. Finds Gonzalez waived her claim to attorney fees.

Eric T. Shamblin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1311-CR-994
Criminal.  Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted child molesting and finding Shamblin is a sexually violent predator.

Sean D. Monroe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1401-CR-28
Criminal. Affirms Monroe’s eight-year sentence following a guilty plea to Class C felony operating a motor vehicle with a controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II in his blood and Class D felony reckless homicide. Remands for the trial court to correct a clerical error in the abstract of judgment.

In the Matter of the Parent Child Relationship of: M.G. (Minor Child), and S.B. (Father) v. Marion County Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1312-JT-1028
Juvenile.  Affirms termination of parental rights.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT