ILNews

Opinions Dec. 2, 2010

December 2, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Juan A. Corona-Gonzalez a/k/a Juan R. Ramirez
09-3993
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge David F. Hamilton.
Criminal. Reverses sentence for drug convictions and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. There is a substantial chance that the District Court’s misapprehension of whether Corona-Gonzalez was deported and returned to the country illegally played a significant role in the adjudication of his sentence. Remands to allow the District Court to reassess the sentence free of the factual misapprehension.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Paul J. Kocielko v. State of Indiana
20A03-1002-CR-218
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor and habitual offender adjudication. Remands with instructions to set aside Class C felony conviction of and sentence for sexual misconduct with a minor because Kocielko committed acts against a single victim in one confrontation, so double jeopardy prohibitions prevented his being convicted of and sentenced for the Class C felony charge. Affirms in all other respects.

Kenneth Pope and Judie Pope v. Hancock County Rural Electric d/b/a Central Indiana Power
30A05-1001-CT-3
Civil tort. Affirms order granting Central Indiana Power’s motion for judgment on the evidence in the Popes’ suit alleging the company was negligent because its failure to timely restore power to their home caused Kenneth to injure himself in the dark. The Popes didn’t establish that a standard of care existed by which CIP should have worked to restore power to its customers after the storm and that there was a breach of that standard of care. CIP’s actions were not the proximate cause of Kenneth’s injuries.

James and Robert New v. Personal Representative of the Estate of Martha New
71A04-0912-CV-744
Civil. Affirms denial of Robert’s combined motion to correct error, motion for relief from judgment, and motion for reconsideration of the court’s approval of the estate of Martha New’s third amended final accounting. The probate court didn’t err when it approved the estate’s third amended accounting without affording time for notice and a hearing. Remands for a determination of appellate attorney fees for the estate.

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. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT