ILNews

Opinions Dec. 28, 2011

December 28, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Metropolitan School District of Pike Township v. Indiana Department of Local Government Finance
49T10-1103-TA-21
Tax.  Reverses the Department of Local Government Finance’s final determination on the school district’s capital project fund level property tax rate for 2011. The DLGF did not properly apply the formula in Indiana Code 6-1.1-18-12(e) when it adjusted Pike Township school district’s capital projects fund levy property tax rate. The DLGF’s use of negative numbers in steps two and four of the formula for tax years 2007 through 2010 to produce a CPF levy property tax rate calculation for 2011 is wrong: it should have used zeros as it was statutorily required. Remands to the DLGF with instructions to recalculate the school district’s CPF levy property tax rates for 2007 through 2010 by using zero values instead of negative values in steps two and four of the formula contained in Indiana Code 6-1.1-18-12(e). These corrections will result in both a step one and a step seven value for 2011 of 0.3100.

Wednesday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

United States of America v. George Pabey
11-2046
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge James T. Moody.
Criminal. Affirms Pabey’s convictions of conspiring to embezzle government funds and embezzling government funds and sentence of 60 months in prison, along with a $60,000 fine, $14,000 in restitution, and three years of supervised release. The District Court did not abuse its discretion by permitting the jury to receive the conscious avoidance instruction. The sentence enhancements were appropriate and the District Court provided adequate support for its upward departure of his sentence.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael Collier v. State of Indiana
49A04-1105-CR-229
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony resisting law enforcement. The trial court erred in denying Collier’s request for a mistrial pursuant to Batson. Remands for a new trial.

Kimberly Heaton v. State of Indiana
48A02-1104-CR-404
Criminal. Reverses revocation of probation and orders Heaton serve 18 months of her previously suspended sentence in the Indiana Department of Correction. The trial court abused its discretion by using the incorrect legal standard in determining if Heaton committed another offense. Remands to the trial court to use the correct legal standard.

Adrian Collins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-523
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery.

Terrence Terren Walker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1104-CR-266
Criminal. Affirms Class A felony dealing cocaine conviction and habitual offender finding and remands with instructions to merge Walker’s Class A felony cocaine possession conviction into his cocaine dealing conviction.

Douglas L. Hayden v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A02-1105-PC-481
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Sheila Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1106-CR-238
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to dismiss charges of theft and fraud on a financial institution.

Kevin Backus v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1105-CR-276
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed upon revoking placement in community corrections.

Todd Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-474
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies criminal recklessness and strangulation.

D.E. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1106-JV-286
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class D felony receiving stolen property if committed by an adult.

A.T. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1010-CR-539
Criminal. Affirms that A.T.’s trial counsel was not ineffective.

Allison Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1106-CR-266
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.W.; N.W. (Mother) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1105-JT-416
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Kevin Hounshell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A01-1105-CR-208
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator, operating a vehicle while intoxicated and a habitual substance offender enhancement.

The Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: D.H.H. & A.M.H., and Carrie Crawford v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
71A03-1107-JT-322
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Larry A. Rowe, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
90A02-1106-CR-518
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony burglary.

Joshua Baker v. Robert Brown (NFP)
68A05-1103-CT-122
Civil tort. Reverses denial of Baker’s motion to correct error and concluded the jury award to Baker was inadequate. Remands for further proceedings.

John T. Hamilton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A05-1103-CR-205
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for three counts of Class A felony child molesting and three counts of Class C felony child molesting.

Walter Angermeier and Wolflin, LLC v. Schultheis Insurance Agency Inc. and William Thompson, Agent (NFP)
65A01-1102-PL-68
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Thompson and Schultheis Insurance Agency on whether there was a breach of general duty of care.

John R. Crawford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
62A04-1102-PC-128
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. A traditional parade of attorneys? Really Evansville? Y'all need to get out more. When is the traditional parade of notaries? Nurses? Sanitation workers? Pole dancers? I gotta wonder, do throngs of admiring citizens gather to laud these marching servants of the constitution? "Show us your billing records!!!" Hoping some video gets posted. Ours is not a narcissistic profession by any chance, is it? Nah .....

  2. My previous comment not an aside at court. I agree with smith. Good call. Just thought posting here a bit on the if it bleeds it leads side. Most attorneys need to think of last lines of story above.

  3. Hello everyone I'm Gina and I'm here for the exact same thing you are. I have the wonderful joy of waking up every morning to my heart being pulled out and sheer terror of what DCS is going to Throw at me and my family today.Let me start from the !bebeginning.My daughter lost all rights to her 3beautiful children due to Severe mental issues she no longer lives in our state and has cut all ties.DCS led her to belive that once she done signed over her right the babies would be with their family. We have faught screamed begged and anything else we could possibly due I hired a lawyer five grand down the drain.You know all I want is my babies home.I've done everything they have even asked me to do.Now their saying I can't see my grandchildren cause I'M on a prescription for paipain.I have a very rare blood disease it causes cellulitis a form of blood poisoning to stay dormant in my tissues and nervous system it also causes a ,blood clotting disorder.even with the two blood thinners I'm on I still Continue to develop them them also.DCS knows about my illness and still they refuse to let me see my grandchildren. I Love and miss them so much Please can anyone help Us my grandchildren and I they should be worrying about what toy there going to play with but instead there worrying about if there ever coming home again.THANK YOU DCS FOR ALL YOU'VE DONE. ( And if anyone at all has any ideals or knows who can help. Please contact (765)960~5096.only serious callers

  4. He must be a Rethuglican, for if from the other side of the aisle such acts would be merely personal and thus not something that attaches to his professional life. AND ... gotta love this ... oh, and on top of talking dirty on the phone, he also, as an aside, guess we should mention, might be important, not sure, but .... "In addition to these allegations, Keaton was accused of failing to file an appeal after he collected advance payment from a client seeking to challenge a ruling that the client repay benefits because of unreported income." rimshot

  5. I am not a fan of some of the 8.4 discipline we have seen for private conduct-- but this was so egregious and abusive and had so many points of bad conduct relates to the law and the lawyer's status as a lawyer that it is clearly a proper and just disbarment. A truly despicable account of bad acts showing unfit character to practice law. I applaud the outcome.

ADVERTISEMENT