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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Ah ha, so the architect of the ISC Commission to advance racial preferences and gender warfare, a commission that has no place at the inn for any suffering religious discrimination, see details http://www.theindianalawyer.com/nominees-selected-for-us-attorney-in-indiana/PARAMS/article/44263 ..... this grand architect of that institutionalized 14th amendment violation just cannot bring himself to utter the word religious discrimination, now can he: "Shepard noted two questions rise immediately from the decision. The first is how will trial courts handle allegations of racism during jury deliberations? The second is does this exception apply only to race? Shepard believes the exception to Rule 606 could also be applied to sexual orientation and gender." Thus barks the Shepard: "Race, gender, sexual orientation". But not religion, oh no, not that. YET CONSIDER ... http://www.pewforum.org/topics/restrictions-on-religion/ Of course the old dog's inability to see this post modern phenomena, but to instead myopically focus on the sexual orientation issues, again betrays one of his pet protects, see here http://www.in.gov/judiciary/admin/files/fair-pubs-summit-agenda.pdf Does such preference also reveal the mind of an anti-religious bigot? There can be no doubt that those on the front lines of the orientation battle often believe religion their enemy. That certainly could explain why the ISC kicked me in the face and down the proverbial crevice when I documented religious discrimination in its antechambers in 2009 .... years before the current turnover began that ended with a whole new court (hallelujah!) in 2017. Details on the kick to my face here http://www.wnd.com/2011/08/329933/ Friends and countrymen, harbor no doubt about it .... anti-religious bias is strong with this old dog, it is. One can only wonder what Hoosier WW2 hero and great jurist Justice Alfred Pivarnik would have made of all of this? Take this comment home for us, Gary Welsh (RIP): http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2005/05/sex-lies-and-supreme-court-justices.html

  2. my sister hit a horse that ran in the highway the horse belonged to an amish man she is now in a nurseing home for life. The family the horse belonged to has paid some but more needs to be paid she also has kids still at home...can we sue in the state f Indiana

  3. Or does the study merely wish they fade away? “It just hasn’t risen substantially in decades,” Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California Hastings College of the Law told Law360. “What we should be looking for is progress, and that’s not what we’re seeing.” PROGRESS = less white males in leadership. Thus the heading and honest questions here ....

  4. One need not wonder why we are importing sex slaves into North America. Perhaps these hapless victims of human trafficking were being imported for a book of play with the Royal Order of Jesters? https://medium.com/@HeapingHelping/who-are-the-royal-order-of-jesters-55ffe6f6acea Indianapolis hosts these major pervs in a big way .... https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Royal-Order-of-Jesters-National-Office/163360597025389 I wonder what affect they exert on Hoosier politics? And its judiciary? A very interesting program on their history and preferences here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtgBdUtw26c

  5. Joseph Buser, Montgomery County Chief Prosecutor, has been involved in both representing the State of Indiana as Prosecutor while filing as Representing Attorney on behalf of himself and the State of Indiana in Civil Proceedings for seized cash and merchandise using a Verified Complaint For Forfeiture of Motor Vehicle, Us Currency And Reimbursement Of Costs, as is evident in Montgomery County Circuit Court Case Number 54C01-1401-MI-000018, CCS below, seen before Judge Harry Siamas, and filed on 01/13/2014. Sheriff Mark Castille is also named. All three defendants named by summons have prior convictions under Mr. Buser, which as the Indiana Supreme Court, in the opinion of The Matter of Mark R. McKinney, No. 18S00-0905-DI-220, stated that McKinney created a conflict of interest by simultaneously prosecuting drug offender cases while pocketing assets seized from defendants in those cases. All moneys that come from forfeitures MUST go to the COMMON SCHOOL FUND.

ADVERTISEMENT