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. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT