ILNews

Opinions Dec. 30, 2010

December 30, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinions were posted after IL deadline Wednesday.

Indiana Tax Court

AOL, LLC v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue (NFP)
49T10-0903-TA-7
Tax. Reverses Indiana Department of State Revenue’s final determinations, which denied AOL’s two claims for refund. Orders the department to refund to AOL the use taxes it paid during the tax periods at issue.

United Parcel Service Inc. v. Indiana Dept. of State Revenue (NFP)
49T10-0704-TA-24
Tax. Grants UPS’ motion for summary judgment and denies the Indiana Department of State Revenue’s motion for summary judgment. Reverses the department’s denial of UPS’ claim for refund of corporate income tax for 2000 and its assessment of additional corporate income tax against UPS for 2001.

Today’s opinions

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Richmond State Hospital, et al. v. Paula Brattain, Francis Ernst, et al.
49A02-0908-CV-718
Civil. Denies the state’s petition and grants the employees’ petition to clarify the Court of Appeals’ instructions on remand for determining the merit employees’ damages. Concludes merit employees are entitled to back pay for the period beginning either 10 days before the filing of the July 29, 1993, complaint, or 10 days before the filing of their individual administrative grievances, whichever comes first, until the date that the state abolished the split class system. The trial court must determine whether the state terminated the split class system on Sept. 12 or Sept. 19, 1993.
 
Kathy Inman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
41A01-1005-CT-223
Civil. Reverses trial court’s denial of Inman’s motion for prejudgment interest pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-51-4-5 in her action against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. Remands with instructions that the trial court’s order be amended to require payment of prejudgment interest consistent with this opinion.

Christopher Jewell v. State of Indiana
32A04-1003-CR-187
Criminal. Affirms convictions and aggregate 40-year term for six counts of sexual misconduct and child molesting. Jewell argued recorded statements admitted as evidence in this case were procured and admitted in violation of his federal and state constitutional rights to counsel. Court of Appeals concludes that Jewell’s statements were not obtained unconstitutionally because although Jewell had been charged and had hired counsel in an unrelated case, he had not been charged with the present crimes when the subject phone calls took place.

Paternity of R.M.; K.B. v. S.M.
45A04-1001-JP-14
Juvenile. Reverses and remands trial court’s order granting the motion filed by S.M. (mother) to dismiss K.B.'s (putative father) petition to establish paternity of S.M.’s child, R.M., based on the doctrine of laches. S.M. married R.M.’s presumptive father when S.M. was pregnant with R.M., who was born in 1996. The presumptive father died in 2006, and a home DNA test that year showed a 99.99 percent chance that K.B. is R.M.’s biological father.

Roscoe C. Fry II v. State of Indiana
30A01-1005-CR-244
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s denial of Fry’s motion to correct erroneous sentence. Remands with instructions to determine whether Fry has completed his sentence and probation and, if not, to clarify or modify his sentence as necessary so that the combined term of the executed portion of Fry’s sentence, including any time served prior to the date of the sentencing order, and his probation do not exceed one year.

K.A. v. State of Indiana
49A02-1004-JV-527
Juvenile. Reverses juvenile court’s modification of dispositional orders after K.A. allegedly violated his probation. K.A. contended the juvenile court violated his due process rights by modifying his disposition after a hearing at which the state presented no evidence of the alleged probation violation. Court of Appeals concludes that because the modification was predicated on the alleged probation violation, principles of fundamental fairness required the state to present evidence of the allegation.

Dwayne Rhoiney v. State of Indiana
49A05-1007-PC-482
Post-conviction. Reverses post-conviction court’s denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands for resentencing.

Hezekiah Colbert v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A04-1004-CR-259
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony attempted murder, Class A felony burglary, and finding that Colbert is a habitual offender.
 
Donnie R. Pierce v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1006-CR-347
Criminal. Concludes the state presented sufficient evidence to convict Pierce of the charged offense, and that the mistake in the Abstract of Judgment should be corrected to enter the conviction of criminal mischief as a Class B misdemeanor.
 
Jeffrey Adams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A04-1006-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms convictions of aiding in reckless homicide, criminal recklessness with a deadly weapon, and reckless driving.
 
Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of S.H., et al.; A.M. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, et al. (NFP)
49A02-1005-JT-623
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.
 
Troy H. Worthington Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1004-CR-223
Criminal. Affirms sentence following a plea of guilty to criminal recklessness, a Class D felony.
 
Johnny N. Standberry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1003-CR-508
Criminal. Affirms convictions of theft, a Class D felony; and resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor.
 
Bernard Markey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1003-PC-371
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
 
Paternity of C.B.; D.B. v. A.C. (NFP)
29A05-1004-JP-321
Juvenile. Affirms trial court’s order awarding A.C. (father) sole physical and legal custody of the parties’ minor child, C.B.
 
In the Matter of Z.T.; S.W. v. Marion Co. Dept. of Child Services, et al. (NFP)
49A04-1004-JC-252
Juvenile. Affirms trial court’s adjudication of Z.T. as a child in need of services.
 
Dione J. Osuna v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1005-CR-252
Criminal. Affirms conviction of possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number, a Class C felony.
 
Kenneth Hopper v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1006-CR-299
Criminal. Affirms sentence following judgment of conviction of guilty but mentally ill.
 
Chester L. Triplett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1001-CR-33
Criminal. Affirms sentence following a plea of guilty to dealing in cocaine, a Class B felony.
 
Opie W. Glass v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1005-CR-247
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony burglary and two counts of Class C felony theft.

C.S. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development, et al. (NFP)
93A02-1005-EX-537
Civil. Affirms the determination of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development, which denied unemployment benefits to C.S.
 
Billy R. Case v. State of Indiana (NFP)
40A01-1004-CR-230
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor and trial court’s restitution order.
 
Charles Hartsell Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1005-PC-359
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
 
Wesley Crabtree v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1006-CR-646
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s order revoking probation and imposing the execution of Crabtree’s previously suspended sentence.
 
Kenny Hawkins Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1005-CR-268
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for dealing in cocaine, a Class B felony.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT