ILNews

Opinions Dec. 5, 2012

December 5, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Gregory Wolfe
11-3281
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Rudy Lozano.
Criminal. Affirms convictions of bank theft and interstate transportation of stolen goods for Wolfe’s role in a copper theft scheme and his 88-month sentence, followed by concurrent three-year terms of supervised release, and order of more than $3 million in restitution. Wolfe argued that he was deprived of a fair trial because of statements the prosecutor made during closing argument. He also challenged the sentence and restitution order. Wolfe’s contentions lack merit.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re the Name Change of John William Resnover and In Re the Name Change of John Arthur Herron
49A02-1205-MI-364
Miscellaneous. Reverses denial of Resnover’s and Herron’s petitions to change their names. The trial court erred when it required a valid driver’s license or valid state ID card as a prerequisite to grant the petition for name change pursuant to I.C. 34-28-2. Remands for further proceedings. Judge Crone dissents in part.

Trenton Teague v. State of Indiana
89A01-1202-CR-86
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentences for Class A felony burglary and Class C felony battery. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting a 911 call and Teague’s aggregate, executed sentence of 40 years is appropriate. Judge Barnes concurs in result.

Bret Lee Sisson v. State of Indiana
09A02-1102-CR-199
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary, Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, receiving stolen property as a Class D felony and adjudication as a habitual offender. There was no fundamental error when the state refiled the previously dismissed SVF charge and habitual offender allegation after Sisson’s first trial ended in a mistrial due to jury deadlock, and the trial court did not err in denying his motion for change of judge for sentencing purposes only. Affirms in all other respects.

Adoption of K.S., A Minor Child: A.S. and D.S. v. C.Z.
85A04-1205-AD-243
Adoption. Reverses denial of verified petition for adoption of K.S. and remands for further proceedings. The trial court erred in concluding that the natural mother’s consent to the adoption of her minor child by stepmother was required.  

Mitchell Burton v. State of Indiana
71A03-1203-CR-129
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony resisting law enforcement and remands for the trial court to vacate. The trial court abused its discretion in refusing to give Burton’s tendered self-defense and resistance of unlawful force instructions.

Tarique Henderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1202-CR-50
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony attempted murder and Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.
 
Agustin Martinez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1203-CR-197
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class C felony child molesting.

Kamari Hogue, A Minor, By and Through His Parent And Next Friend, Trent Hogue v. Robert Critz, Jr. (NFP)
02A05-1204-CT-192
Civil tort. Affirms jury verdict in Critz’s favor on Houge’s suit for negligence.

Robert D. Rogers, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1204-CR-211
Criminal. Affirms conviction of failure to register as offender, elevated to a Class C felony as a result of a previous conviction for failure to register.

Mahamat Outman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1204-CR-197
Criminal. Affirms application of the credit restricted felon statute to Outman’s conviction for Class A felony child molesting as alleged in Count III was not an ex post facto violation.

Kelvin Whitby v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1205-CR-226
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony domestic battery.

First Chicago Insurance Company v. Philip Hempel, Farm Bureau Insurance Company of Michigan, and American Transportation on Time, Inc. (NFP)
71A03-1202-PL-64
Civil plenary. Affirms dismissal of First Chicago’s complaint for declaratory judgment. The trial court did not err in dismissing the declaratory judgment action on principles of comity.

Susan Edwards v. Deutsche Bank National, Trust Company (NFP)
02A03-1201-MF-24
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the bank in the bank’s in rem action against real property owned by Edwards.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: A.T., Minor Child, M.T., Father v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
42A04-1203-JT-118
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of father’s parental rights.

Herman Gehl, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
13A01-1203-CR-92
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class D felony invasion of privacy.
 

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. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  2. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  3. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  4. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  5. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

ADVERTISEMENT