ILNews

Opinions Dec. 7, 2012

December 7, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Terry L. Brown v. Tammy S. Brown
77A01-1204-PL-180
Civil plenary. Reverses civil judgment in favor of Terry Brown’s ex-wife. The trial court abused its discretion when it admitted evidence regarding criminal offenses he committed more than 20 years ago. Remands for further proceedings.

Robert Geller and Judy Geller v. Kurt P. Kinney, Holly Kinney, and A.M. Rentals, Inc.
29A02-1111-PL-1202
Civil plenary. Affirms judgment in favor of A.M. Rentals Inc. and the trial court’s calculation of damages for the Gellers against the Kinneys. Holds that the exculpatory clause of the lease and management agreement exempts A.M. from liability for its failure to perform its duties to the Gellers under I.C. 25-34.1-10-10(a)(3)(C). Holds that applying the exculpatory clause on these facts is not contrary to public policy. Holds that the trial court’s conclusion that the Gellers’ sale of their home mitigated the Kinneys’ damages to the Gellers is not clearly erroneous. Judge Kirsch dissents.

Verdyer Clark v. State of Indiana
49A04-1202-CR-66
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony battery. The state did not prove its case because the only evidence it offered to prove Clark was over 18 at the time of the crime was inadmissible hearsay. Remands so that the state may decide whether to retry Clark.

Phillip T. Billingsley v. State of Indiana
02A05-1204-CR-216
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of marijuana. Holds that based on the totality of the facts and circumstances available to the responding officer at the time he detained Billingsley, the officer initiated an investigatory stop of Billingsley based on a reasonable and articulable suspicion that he was engaged in criminal activity. Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted into evidence marijuana seized following the officer’s detention of Billingsley. Judge Kirsch dissents.
 
Brenda Varo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1203-CR-144
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony conspiracy to commit battery and Class D felony criminal gang activity.

In Re the Marriage of Lisa L. Shisler and Ned L. Shisler; Ned L. Shisler v. Lisa L. Shisler (NFP)
57A03-1109-DR-450
Domestic relation. Reverses distribution of marital estate and remands for further proceedings.

Vickie Jessie v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1205-CR-413
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony criminal deviate conduct and order that Jessie pay $2,090 in restitution to her victim.

Michael R. Krohn v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1203-CR-131
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated causing serious bodily injury.

Quinn Nelson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1203-CR-145
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted murder and adjudication as a habitual offender.

Anthony White v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-321
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony attempted theft and Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Deandre L. Mathews v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1205-CR-416
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.

Andrea Averitte v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1203-CR-251
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony forgery.

Michael McClellan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1204-CR-180
Criminal. Affirms sentence following conviction of two counts of Class C felony stalking.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(https://www.affordablebackgroundchecks.com/).

  2. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-privacy-in-the-age-of-internet-of-things/

  3. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  4. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous

  5. Here's my two cents. While in Texas in 2007 I was not registered because I only had to do it for ten years. So imagine my surprise as I find myself forced to register in Texas because indiana can't get their head out of their butt long enough to realize they passed an ex post facto law in 2006. So because Indiana had me listed as a failure to register Texas said I had to do it there. Now if Indiana had done right by me all along I wouldn't need the aclu to defend my rights. But such is life.

ADVERTISEMENT