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. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

  2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

  3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

ADVERTISEMENT