ILNews

Opinions Feb. 17, 2014

February 17, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Friday:
United States of America v. Steven J. Perry
13-2182
U.S. District court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Robert L. Miller Jr.
Criminal. Vacates Perry’s five-year sentence and the additional conditions of supervision imposed by the court in its written judgment. Remands with instructions to sentence Perry to no more than two years imprisonment for his latest violation of supervised release and to determine Perry’s conditions of supervision. The District Court erred in imposing the mandatory five-year term because the version of 18 U.S.C. Section 3583(k) in effect at the time of his initial offense authorized a maximum sentence of only two years.

United States of America v. Tyler Sanders
13-1301
U.S. District court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Criminal. Affirms 120-month sentence following guilty plea to possessing more than 50 grams of cocaine base with intent to distribute. The exclusionary rule does not apply at sentencing. The District judge did not err in following 18 U.S.C. Section 3661 and considering the evidence found during the search of Sander’s home.

Monday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

Rakiea McCaskill v. State of Indiana
49A02-1306-CR-480
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor intimidation. The state did not provide sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that McCaskill committed Class A misdemeanor intimidation as charged. The state did produce sufficient evidence that McCaskill committed Class B misdemeanor harassment. Remands to the trial court with instructions to vacate McCaskill’s judgment of conviction for intimidation and to enter a judgment of conviction for McCaskill for Class B misdemeanor harassment.

Northern Indiana Public Service Company v. Edward A. Sloan, Dashawn L. Cole
45A03-1307-SC-254
Small claim. Affirms orders reinstating the driving privileges of Edward Sloan and Dashwan Cole. NIPSCO has not established that the trial court erred as a matter of law when it permitted Sloan and Cole to make installment payments of $50 per month even if the plan would not result in the payment of the judgment in full during the 7-year suspension period. NIPSCO has not made a prima facie showing that equity requires the continued suspension of their driving privileges. NIPSCO waived its argument regarding the trial court’s contacting the BMV by failing to object to that procedure during the hearing.

David Buchanan v. Carol Buchanan (NFP) 
60A01-1304-DR-189
Domestic relation. Affirms property division and valuation of certain property in decree of dissolution.

Aaron M. Fellows v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1305-CR-244
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony burglary resulting in bodily injury and Class B felony attempted robbery resulting in bodily injury.

Jose G. Alejandro v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1306-CR-224
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for attempted murder.

Dominique Brisker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-1307-CR-337
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

William Mosher v. Haesuk Yi Mosher (NFP)
43A05-1305-GU-286
Guardianship. Affirms dismissal of William Mosher’s petition for guardianship of his incapacitated adult daughter for lack of jurisdiction.

$2,500.00 In Lawful United States Currency, 2002 Chevrolet Avalanche, and 1970 Chevrolet El Camino (Demarco D. Hawkins) v. State of Indiana, et al. (NFP)
82A01-1307-MI-326
Miscellaneous. Reverses order granting forfeiture of the Avalanche and El Camino that were seized when Hawkins was arrested for suspicion of dealing in marijuana.

Sonia Long v. City of Logansport, Building Commissioner (NFP)
09A04-1305-PL-249
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the city of Logansport requiring Long to comply with a previous order issued by the city to raze a building she owns.

Jason Tye Myers v. Charles R. Deets III, Deets & Kennedy, and Great American Insurance Group (NFP)
79A02-1306-CT-521
Civil tort. Affirms grant of Charles Deets III’s motion to dismiss and grant of Great American Insurance Group’s motion for summary judgment on Myers complaints against them.

Christopher Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1306-CR-301
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary, Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief and determination Smith is a habitual offender.

Lori Harrold v. L & D Mailmasters (NFP)
93A02-1306-EX-564
Agency action. Affirms order of the Worker’s Compensation Board denying Harrold’s application for adjustment of her workers’ compensation claim.

James Christian Warner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A01-1305-CR-212
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony attempted inmate fraud.

Barnard Lockett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1307-CR-653
Criminal. Affirms revocation of community corrections placement.

Michael R. Jent v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1304-PC-217
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Travis Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1307-CR-316
Criminal. Affirms Smith’s convictions of Class B felony failure to stop after an accident resulting in serious bodily injury while intoxicated and Class B misdemeanor failure to stop after an accident resulting in damage to property other than a vehicle, vacates his habitual offender enhancement and remands the case for further proceedings.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is closed Monday in observance of Presidents Day.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

ADVERTISEMENT