ILNews

Opinions Aug. 30, 2011

August 30, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.


Indiana Court of Appeals
Martin A. Villalon, Jr. v. State of Indiana
45A03-1010-CR-544
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder and 60-year sentence, holding the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in waiving Villalon to adult court, and that the Sixth Amendment does not apply to juvenile proceedings.

State of Indiana v. Alfonso M. Chavez
45A03-1012-CR-619
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s determination that statements made implicating Chavez are inadmissible as hearsay evidence, and that, accordingly, the state’s claim that the Sixth Amendment does not require exclusion of the evidence will not be considered as part of the appeal.

Wayne K. Smith v. State of Indiana
28A05-1011-CR-704
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to suppress evidence, holding that the search warrant did not violate Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

D.W. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A03-1104-JV-176
Juvenile. Affirms judgment of juvenile court committing D.W. to the Indiana Department of Correction.

Marvin Mallet v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1102-CR-51
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion for misdemeanor treatment.

Jennifer Fulton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1101-CR-132
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony possession of cocaine and associated charges.

Tom Kenneth v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1102-CR-167
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony burglary.

Brian C. Feely v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1101-CR-20
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated after having been convicted of operating a vehicle while intoxicated causing death.

Joe M. Meyers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1103-PC-144
Post conviction. Affirms denial of request for post-conviction relief.

Terrance R. Huber v. Montgomery County Sheriff (NFP)
54A01-1008-CT-558
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s award of discovery sanctions to the Montgomery County Sheriff and remands to the trial court for a determination of appellate attorney fees and costs to be awarded to the sheriff’s office.

Lawrence Ray Holley II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1005-PC-652
Post conviction. Dismisses appeal, holding that the post-conviction court’s order denying Holley’s petition constituted a final judgment.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of B.M.; L.M. v. IDCS (NFP)
49A02-1012-JT-1441
Juvenile. Affirms termination of father’s parental rights.

Jay A. Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
36A01-1011-CR-583
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Terry Durbin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
68A01-1012-CR-608
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony murder.

William R. Robison v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A01-1102-CR-33
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s finding that Robison violated the terms of his probation and should serve five years of his previously suspended sentence.

In Re The Marriage of: Daniel Madden v. Tracy Madden n/k/a Tracy Chavez (NFP)
46A05-1102-DR-115
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s denial of father’s petition to modify custody. Denies mother’s request to remand to the trial court for assessment of appellate attorney fees against father, finding the fee assessment is unwarranted.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT