ILNews

Opinions Dec. 6, 2011

December 6, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
A.A.Q. v. State of Indiana
71A03-1105-JV-239
Juvenile. Affirms judgment of juvenile court finding A.A.Q. a juvenile delinquent for committing an act that would have been Class A misdemeanor trespass if committed by an adult. Holds that A.A.Q. and his parents waived the right to counsel.

Tyronne Dickerson v. State of Indiana
45A04-1104-CR-160
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class A felony dealing in narcotics, holding the trial court did not err in granting state’s request to allow a confidential informant to testify and that Dickerson was not able to prove that the testimony substantially tainted the entire trial.   

Continental Insurance Co., National Fire Insurance Co. of Hartford, Continental Casualty Co., and Columbia Casualty Co. v. Wheelabrator Technologies, Inc., and Waste Management Holdings, Inc.
49A02-1010-PL-1110
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court’s determination that Waste Management Holdings might be entitled to coverage under the insurers’ policies. Remands to trial court for proceedings consistent with opinion. Judge James Kirsch dissented without a separate opinion.

Bonita G. Hilliard, in her capacity as Trustee of the H. David and Bonita G. Hilliard Living Trust v. Timothy E. Jacobs
28A04-1106-CT-284
Civil tort. Affirms trial court’s ruling in favor of Jacobs, finding no merit in Hilliard’s due process and fundamental fairness concerns and that res judicata applies, as the issues have already been decided adversely to Hilliard.

Indiana Regional Recycling, Inc.v. Belmont Industrial, Inc.
49A02-1103-PL-263
Civil plenary. Reverses trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Belmont Industrial, holding that the trial court erred in granting Belmont’s cross-motion for partial summary judgment and motion for summary judgment based on its findings that Indiana Regional did not have an easement on Belmont’s property and that it erred in finding Belmont did not commit tortious interference with Indiana Regional’s contract with its tenant. Remands for further proceedings.

John V. Dora v. State of Indiana
07A01-1102-CR-51
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to suppress evidence, holding that warrantless searches did not violate Dora’s rights under the Fourth Amendment or under Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

Toshiano Ishii, Matthew Stone, Greg Hardin, Lisa Hardin, William Neely, and Michael Grider, et al. v. The Hon. William E. Young, Judge
49A02-1103-PL-316
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s order granting Judge William E. Young’s motion to dismiss, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that it lacked jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus or prohibition and that appellants lacked standing.

Toby Carroll v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1008-CR-572
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s order denying motion for jail time credit, holding Carroll was due no credit time for time served prior to sentencing.

Michael Anthony Castillo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1104-CR-154
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony reckless homicide. Holds that while trial court abused its discretion by using an improper aggravating factor, Castillo’s sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.

Cameron Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1103-CR-102
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder.

Spencer Norvell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-1104-CR-349
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony trafficking with an inmate.

A.D. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1105-JV-451
Juvenile. Affirms true finding that A.D. committed an act that would constitute the offense of Class B felony attempted robbery if committed by an adult.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of H.B., B.B., and J.M.; C.M. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, and Lake County Court Appointed Special Advocate (NFP)
45A03-1104-JT-144
Juvenile. Affirms termination of mother’s parental rights.

Travis L. Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-1103-CR-194
Criminal. Affirms sentence of six years, with one suspended to probation, for Class B misdemeanor visiting a common nuisance.

Gary Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1105-CR-400
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

In Re the Marriage of: Duane Maxwell Jennings v. Richelle Danea Jennings (NFP)
49A04-1101-DR-60
Domestic relation. Holds that marriage dissolution decree committed a clerical error in not requiring the wife to transfer car title to the husband and remands for action consistent with opinion. Affirms decree in other regards.

Ronald Coldren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1106-CR-320
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony robbery.

Toriano Meade v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1104-CR-363
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana and Class B felony possession of cocaine.

Louis D. Cole v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1105-CR-199
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of S.S., C.T., K.G.T., and K.M.T.; L.S. and A.T. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
10A04-1102-JT-92
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights for mother and father.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court had issued no opinions as of IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT