ILNews

Opinions Dec. 27, 2010

December 27, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Paternity of M.F., et al.; J.F. v. W.M.
21A04-1002-JP-84
Juvenile. Affirms denial of mother’s petition to establish paternity with respect to M.F. Mother failed to prove that insemination incurred in such a way as to render the donor agreement unenforceable and void as against public policy. Reverses finding that a valid, enforceable contract existed that would prohibit an action to establish paternity of C.F., the second child born. Remands to grant mother’s petition to establish paternity with respect to C.F. Judge Crone dissents in part.

Victor T. Jones v. State of Indiana
32A04-1004-CR-309
Criminal. Affirms conviction of resisting law enforcement as a Class D felony. The state’s naming of Officer Stewart in the charging information, which was not the correct name, was surplusage that was not required for a conviction, and therefore the evidence was sufficient to convict Jones of resisting law enforcement. Jones was subjected to double jeopardy when he was convicted of enhanced versions of both resisting law enforcement and criminal recklessness. Remands to reduce his criminal recklessness conviction to a Class B misdemeanor and re-sentence him accordingly. Reverses the jury, public defender, and docket fees and remands for further proceedings.

The Matter of D.R. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-JV-436
Juvenile. Reverses and vacates D.R.’s finding for attempted carjacking as a Class B felony if committed by an adult and remands with instructions to amend the dispositional order to reflect a true finding for attempted robbery only, a Class B felony if committed by an adult.

Joshua Beal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-347
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery and the order Beal pay restitution to his victim.

S.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
83A05-1005-JV-328
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication that S.J. committed what would be Class B misdemeanor battery if committed by an adult.

Miguel Alvarado v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-1001-CR-159
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty pleas to criminal confinement and battery.

Michael J. Skoczylas v. Peggy C. Skoczylas (NFP)
71A03-1005-DR-317
Domestic relation. Affirms trial court’s adoption of the values of the parties' United States Postal Service pensions. Reverses decision that Michael be responsible for their son’s student loans and Peggy be responsible for their daughter’s loans. Remands with instructions.

Martel Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1003-CR-169
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder.

Kenneth E. Lovelace v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1003-CR-183
Criminal. Affirms convictions of guilty but mentally ill and sentence for Class B felony burglary and Class D felony attempted theft.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of J.B., et al.; A.M. and D.B. v. IDCS (NFP)
07A04-1005-JT-322
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

McIntyre Brothers, Inc. v. Kim D. Henderson, Melinda J. Henderson, Sydneyco, LLC, et al. (NFP)
47A01-1004-PL-172
Civil plenary. Affirms partial summary judgment to the effect that apportion of the Fifth Third mortgage lien, specifically that attributable to the Stone City mortgage payoff, is superior to McIntyre’s mechanic’s lien. Reverses order of foreclosure which decreed that McIntyre had no mechanic’s lien. Remands for further proceedings.

Denon Dabney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1004-CR-474
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Virgil L. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
43A03-1004-CR-245
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony robbery.

William Newhouse v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1001-CR-34
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class B felony burglary, Class B felony attempted burglary, Class D felony stalking, three counts of Class D felony voyeurism, Class D felony attempted residential entry, Class A misdemeanor public indecency, and Class C misdemeanor public nudity.

Steve Uribe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-CR-346
Criminal. Affirms 180-day executed portion of Uribe’s 365-day sentence for Class A misdemeanor criminal recklessness.

Kenneth McCreary v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-179
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

James F. Griffith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1006-PC-705
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT