Opinions Dec. 6, 2011

December 6, 2011
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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)
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)
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)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of felony murder.

Spencer Norvell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony trafficking with an inmate.

A.D. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
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)
Juvenile. Affirms termination of mother’s parental rights.

Travis L. Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
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)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

In Re the Marriage of: Duane Maxwell Jennings v. Richelle Danea Jennings (NFP)
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)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony robbery.

Toriano Meade v. State of Indiana (NFP)
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)
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)
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.


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.