ILNews

Opinions Feb. 21, 2013

February 21, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court decisions were posted Wednesday after IL deadline:
Kathleen Peterink v. State of Indiana
57S03-1302-CR-136
Criminal. Affirms Peterink’s original sentence of one year imprisonment, suspended the sentence entirely, and placed her on probation for one year, six months of which was to be served on home detention. Affirms the Court of Appeals order that the trial court amend the sentencing order to allow for credit time for home detention.

Joey Jennings v. State of Indiana
53S01-1209-CR-526
Criminal. Summarily affirms sufficient evidence supports the Class B misdemeanor conviction for vandalizing another man’s truck. Holds that the phrase “term of imprisonment” as used in Indiana’s misdemeanor sentencing statute, does not include time suspended from a sentence. Remands for the trial court to impose a probationary period not to exceed 355 days – the difference between one year and the 30 days Jennings was ordered to serve in prison.

Thursday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals
Curtis Tyrell Cutler v. State of Indiana

71A05-1206-CR-339
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary. Finds there was sufficient evidence to warrant a jury finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Cutler committed the burglary. Holds the trial court did not err in permitting the use of a statement Cutler made to police for impeachment.

Robert A. Carmer v. State of Indiana (NFP)

03A04-1208-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

David Purlee v. State of Indiana (NFP)

88A01-1210-IF-458
Infraction. Reverses entry of default judgment against Purlee for driving while suspended and remands for further proceedings.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT