ILNews

Opinions Dec. 28, 2012

December 28, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
James M. Brinkley and Stephanie L. Brinkley v. Michael Haluska, P.E., d/b/a Retro Tech, et al.
32A01-1204-MI-181
Miscellaneous. Affirms trial court’s summary judgment that Donald Gindelberger is a good faith purchaser for value of a 1965 Chevrolet Corvette because the Brinkleys were in the best position to prevent the allegedly fraudulent sale and did not do so. Also, it concluded the BMV is immune from liability.  

Joel Zivot v. Pamela London
49A02-1207-DR-613
Domestic relation. Reverses order and judgment on verified petition for contempt, holding that the documents before the court on which the judgment was based contained no evidence that such agreements had been approved by a court or incorporated into a court order.

Duke Energy Indiana, Inc. v. Office of the Utility Consumer Counselor, Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission
93A02-1111-EX-1042
Executive administration/utility. Affirms IURC denial of Duke’s request for deferred accounting of more than $11 million in storm-related expenses in a rehearing, holding that there were changes in the evidence from the first hearing that justified the IURC’s decision, and that the IURC was not required to explain why it reached a different conclusion.

Ricky Jester v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1203-CR-141
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of Jester’s motion for correction of erroneous sentence.

Johnny C. Horton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1206-PC-316
Post Conviction Relief Petition. Affirms the denial of Horton’s petition for post-conviction relief.

State of Indiana v. Elvis Holtsclaw (NFP)
49A02-1108-CR-743
Criminal. Finds no abuse of discretion and affirms trial court’s suppression of breath test evidence

Michael Watson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-443
Criminal. Affirms 90-year sentence. Concludes that trial court did not abuse its discretion in instructing the jury that it could not disregard the law for any reason during the guilt phase of Watson’s trial and that Watson failed to show his sentence is inappropriate.

In Re the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of K.K.; R.I. v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
18A02-1205-JT-434
Juvenile Termination of Parental Rights. Affirms order involuntarily terminating father’s parental rights.

Steven McIntyre v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A04-1207-PC-377
Post Conviction Relief Petition. Affirms the post-conviction court’s judgment in granting the state’s motion to correct error and denies McIntyre’s request for relief.

Alexander A. Lopez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
63A04-1201-CR-35
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor dealing in marijuana.

State of Indiana v. Blake Lodde (NFP)
79A02-1206-CR-496
Criminal. Reverses the granting of the motion to suppress evidence gathered when Lodde was pulled over and remands for further proceedings.

William Holly v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A04-1109-MI-492
Miscellaneous. Affirms trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the state of Indiana.

Jesus Torres v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1205-CR-233
Criminal. Affirms the trial court’s judgment to send an audiotape back to the jury during deliberations. The tape recorded Torres’ conversations with his granddaughter about him molesting her.

Randell Vandeventer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A04-1205-CR-242
Criminal. Affirms Vandeventer’s conviction of three counts of Class C felony child molesting and aggregated sentence of 21 years.

Guy Cummings v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1205-CR-430
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft, finding evidence was sufficient.

Mark Sexton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-282
Criminal. Affirms Sexton’s habitual-offender enhancement after his felony convictions. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding good cause to allow the state to file the habitual-offender information more than 10 days after the omnibus date.

Rebecca J. Bartle v. Jackson Street Investors, LLC as Assignee of Paul E. Turner (NFP)
29A05-1205-CC-246
Civil Collection. Reverses trial court’s granting Jackson Street’s motion for summary judgment and remands for further proceedings.

Benito S. Gamba, Hilda P. Gamba and Gamba Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. The Ross Group, Inc., Ticor Title Ins. Co. v. The Ross Group, Inc., Benito Gamba, Hilda Gamba and Gamba Real Est. Holdings (NFP)
45A03-1202-PL-92
Civil Plenary. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands. Concludes trial court did not err in holding Gamba responsible for the construction cost overage but reverses on the issues of Ticor’s right to indemnification and the amount of a subcontractor lien.

Kieth McCoy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-CR-451
Criminal. Dismisses McCoy’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Finds the denial of the motion to lift the no-contact order was not a final appealable order and McCoy has not properly preserved this issue for appeal.

Quintez Deloney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A01-1204-CR-153
Criminal. Affirms Deloney’s consecutive, executed sentences of eight years for Class C felony robbery and 30 years for Class A burglary.

Manuel J. Silva v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1204-CR-190
Criminal. Affirms conviction of murder, finding the evidence was sufficient to rebut Silva’s self-defense claim.

In Re The Adoption of C.H.; M.W. v. B.H. and V.H. (NFP)
85A02-1205-AD-449
Adoption. Affirms trial court’s post-hearing order concluding that M.W.’s consent to the adoption of her child, C.H., is not required under I.C. 31-19-9-8.

Robert R. Ashcraft v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-1109-CR-396
Criminal. Affirms Ashcraft’s convictions and 21-year sentence for two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor, Class C felony sexual misconduct with a minor, and Class D felony child seduction.

Paul Marcum v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1205-CR-240
Criminal. Affirms Marcum’s 27-month sentence for his conviction of Class D felony Operation a Motor Vehicle After Suspension as a Habitual Traffic Violator.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Yes diversity is so very important. With justice Rucker off ... the court is too white. Still too male. No Hispanic justice. No LGBT justice. And there are other checkboxes missing as well. This will not do. I say hold the seat until a physically handicapped Black Lesbian of Hispanic heritage and eastern religious creed with bipolar issues can be located. Perhaps an international search, with a preference for third world candidates, is indicated. A non English speaker would surely increase our diversity quotient!!!

  2. First, I want to thank Justice Rucker for his many years of public service, not just at the appellate court level for over 25 years, but also when he served the people of Lake County as a Deputy Prosecutor, City Attorney for Gary, IN, and in private practice in a smaller, highly diverse community with a history of serious economic challenges, ethnic tensions, and recently publicized but apparently long-standing environmental health risks to some of its poorest residents. Congratulations for having the dedication & courage to practice law in areas many in our state might have considered too dangerous or too poor at different points in time. It was also courageous to step into a prominent and highly visible position of public service & respect in the early 1990's, remaining in a position that left you open to state-wide public scrutiny (without any glitches) for over 25 years. Yes, Hoosiers of all backgrounds can take pride in your many years of public service. But people of color who watched your ascent to the highest levels of state government no doubt felt even more as you transcended some real & perhaps some perceived social, economic, academic and professional barriers. You were living proof that, with hard work, dedication & a spirit of public service, a person who shared their same skin tone or came from the same county they grew up in could achieve great success. At the same time, perhaps unknowingly, you helped fellow members of the judiciary, court staff, litigants and the public better understand that differences that are only skin-deep neither define nor limit a person's character, abilities or prospects in life. You also helped others appreciate that people of different races & backgrounds can live and work together peacefully & productively for the greater good of all. Those are truths that didn't have to be written down in court opinions. Anyone paying attention could see that truth lived out every day you devoted to public service. I believe you have been a "trailblazer" in Indiana's legal community and its judiciary. I also embrace your belief that society's needs can be better served when people in positions of governmental power reflect the many complexions of the population that they serve. Whether through greater understanding across the existing racial spectrum or through the removal of some real and some perceived color-based, hope-crushing barriers to life opportunities & success, movement toward a more reflective representation of the population being governed will lead to greater and uninterrupted respect for laws designed to protect all peoples' rights to life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness. Thanks again for a job well-done & for the inevitable positive impact your service has had - and will continue to have - on countless Hoosiers of all backgrounds & colors.

  3. Diversity is important, but with some limitations. For instance, diversity of experience is a great thing that can be very helpful in certain jobs or roles. Diversity of skin color is never important, ever, under any circumstance. To think that skin color changes one single thing about a person is patently racist and offensive. Likewise, diversity of values is useless. Some values are better than others. In the case of a supreme court justice, I actually think diversity is unimportant. The justices are not to impose their own beliefs on rulings, but need to apply the law to the facts in an objective manner.

  4. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  5. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

ADVERTISEMENT