The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday:
Indiana Supreme Court
Jeffrey E. Akard v. State of Indiana
79S02-1009-CR-478
Criminal. Summarily affirms the Indiana Court of Appeals in all respects except as to its conclusion that the trial court’s
sentencing decision was inappropriate and required a substantial upward revision to 118 years. Declines to intervene in the
trial court’s determination that the appropriate sentence is 93 years. Makes a minor correction to Akard’s sentence
on his two Class C felony battery charges and revises his sentence to be an aggregate of 94 years. Remands for re-sentencing.
Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
David Snowberger v. State of Indiana
09A02-1005-CR-570
Criminal. Reverses revocation of probation. Snowberger’s plea agreement to nonsupport of a dependent child required
the state to show his failure to pay child support to be willful and he has the ability to make payments before his probation
could be revoked. The evidence was insufficient to support the revocation.
G.D. v. Review Board
93A02-1007-EX-718
Civil. Reverses denial of G.D.’s motion to reinstate his appeal from an adverse determination of his claim for unemployment
benefits. There is nothing in the record to support the director of Unemployment Insurance Appeals’ or the review board’s
decisions to deny his motion to reinstate his appeal based upon the lack of showing of good cause. Remands for further proceedings.
Jonathon L. Dillard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1008-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony attempted theft.
Carlene L. Henry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1006-CR-326
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.
Tommie Reives v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-796
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for earned credit time.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.














Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone
John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.
In regards to bill's comment about trusting the cover meant. We can trust them about as much as we can trust attorneys'.
This is disturbing to learn...
Yikes!