Opinions Dec. 2, 2010

December 2, 2010
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
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
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
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
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.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues