ILNews

Opinions Feb. 19, 2014

February 19, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
State of Indiana v. William Coats
49S02-1305-CR-328
Criminal. Remands to the trial court with an order to commit Coats to the Division of Mental Health and Addiction. I.C. 35-36-3-1(b) requires trial courts to commit defendants found not competent to stand trial to the DMHA for competency restoration services.

Wednesday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals

David D. Kiely v. Kathryn Starnes-Kiely (NFP)
14A04-1307-DR-372
Domestic relation. Affirms equal division of marital estate.

Tyrone Wilbourn v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A05-1306-CR-262
Criminal. Affirms conviction of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon as a Class B felony.

Christena Seifried v. Dukes Health System, LLC, d/b/a Dukes Memorial Hospital (NFP)
49A02-1305-CT-435
Civil tort. Reverses summary judgment in favor of the hospital in Seifried’s action for personal injuries allegedly suffered as a result of her fall in the hospital.

Kenneth Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1306-CR-535
Criminal. Reverses and remands with instructions to vacate Davis’ Class A misdemeanor battery conviction. Affirms conviction of battery as a Class C felony.

Heriberto M. Andrade v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1307-CR-289
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine weighing three grams or more and two counts of Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

James Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1306-CR-292
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felonies possession of cocaine and a firearm, and possession of cocaine; and Class A misdemeanors possession of marijuana and carrying a handgun without being licensed. Remands to correct trial court records.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT