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. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  2. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  3. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  4. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

  5. "...not those committed in the heat of an argument." If I ever see a man physically abusing a woman or a child and I'm close enough to intercede I will not ask him why he is abusing her/him. I will give him a split second to cease his attack and put his hands in the air while I call the police. If he continues, I will still call the police but to report, "Man down with a gunshot wound,"instead.

ADVERTISEMENT