ILNews

Opinions Aug. 6, 2014

August 6, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Kevin Davis v. State of Indiana
49A05-1310-CR-523
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury. L.H.’s statements to police identifying Davis as participating in the beating and robbery were properly admitted, the trial court did not err when it determined two witnesses had made themselves unavailable and therefore allowed their depositions to be admitted into evidence at trial, and there is sufficient evidence supporting the conviction.

Craig Alvey v. State of Indiana

20A04-1310-MI-533
Miscellaneous. Affirms petition for rehearing of the denial of Alvey’s petition to expunge records of his conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of cocaine. Finds that Alvey does not have to wait three years to file a new petition to expunge his Class A misdemeanor conviction under the new, more liberal standards of I.C. 35-38-8-2 (2014). Affirms in all other respects.

Cherokee Air Products, Inc., Cherokee Family Limited Partnership, Tippmann Industrial Products, Inc., Dennis Tippmann, Sr. Family Partnership, LLP, and Tippmann Farms, LLC v. Bruce E. Buchan
02A05-1312-PL-635
Civil plenary. Affirms on interlocutory appeal the order granting partial summary judgment in favor of Buchan in an action alleging breach of his employment contract and seeking damages. There are no genuine issues of material fact precluding the entry of partial summary judgment on the issue of his entitlement to retire.

Arthur Gutierrez, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1309-CR-365
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting.

In the Matter of J.K., A Child in Need of Services, M.K., Father v. Marion County Department of Child Services and Child Advocates, Inc. (NFP)
49A02-1312-JC-1008
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication that J.K. is a child in need of services.

Jeffery A. Foster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
14A01-1311-CR-522
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery resulting in bodily injury and imposition of $120 in costs and fees. Remands for hearing to assess Foster’s ability to pay an additional $48 in other fees.

Daniel Utterback v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1312-CR-1021
Criminal. Affirms seven-year sentence for Class C felony child molesting.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court released no opinions prior to IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by 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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT