ILNews

Opinions Aug. 5, 2010

August 5, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

United States of America v. Adam Williams
09-3174
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge James T. Moody.
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for illegal possession of a firearm as a felon and various drug distribution offenses. Williams couldn’t satisfy his burden under either prong of the Strickland standard, so the District Court’s refusal to investigate further his perceived problems with his attorney is a harmless abuse of discretion. Because Williams was convicted of a violent felony, his claim that Section 922(g)(1) unconstitutionally infringes on his right to possess a firearm is without merit.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Alva Curtis v. State of Indiana
49A02-0911-CR-1106
Criminal. Reverses denial of Curtis’ motion to dismiss and discharge criminal proceedings. It is undisputed that he is mentally ill and disabled to an extent that he will never recover and become competent to stand trial. It was a violation of his due process rights to deny his motion.

State of Indiana v. Genaro Luna
09A02-0907-CR-694
Criminal. Affirms acquittal on eight counts of child molesting. Waives state’s question of law about whether the trial court should not have admitted evidence of the victim’s previous allegations of molesting against someone who was not charged. Also, because factual determinations are not appropriate on appeal as a reserved question of law, declines to review the trial court’s decision to admit the evidence.

Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Seth McNeil
02A03-1001-MI-90
Miscellaneous. Reverses order reinstating McNeil’s driving privileges, which had been suspended for 10 years after he was found to be a habitual traffic violator. The two-year statute of limitations under Indiana Code Section 34-11-2-4 does not apply.

Stephanie Deel v. Conrad Deel (NFP)
73A01-0912-CV-606
Civil. Reverses calculation of Conrad Deel’s arrearage. Affirms in all other respects. Remands for further proceedings.

Jerimiah Morris v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A05-1001-CR-16
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony possession of marijuana.

Ellington Jeffrey, et al. v. Kirsh and Kirsh, et al. (NFP)
45A03-1001-CT-31
Civil tort. Affirms trial court properly dismissed the New York law firm for lack of personal jurisdiction in adoption case.

Agnes Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1283
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal recklessness.

Edward Broadus, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1003-CR-158
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony forgery, and resisting law enforcement, a Class D felony upon which judgment was entered as a Class A misdemeanor.

Warren Rodrick Bullock v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-0908-CR-401
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony criminal confinement and reverses conviction of Class D felony domestic battery. Remands for trial court to enter a conviction for the lesser included offense of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery and sentence Bullock accordingly.

Billy D. Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A05-1002-CR-84
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Myron Rickman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A04-1002-CR-80
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to eight counts of Class A felony child molesting, one count of Class C felony child molesting, and one count of Class C felony criminal confinement.

R.J. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, et al. (NFP)
93A02-1002-EX-243
Civil. Affirms decision that R.J. left work without good cause.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of N.B. and V.B.; S.E.S. v. IDCS (NFP)
18A02-1001-JT-9
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT