ILNews

Opinions Feb. 22, 2012

February 22, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court

Jerrme Cartwright v. State of Indiana
82S01-1109-CR-564
Criminal. Affirms convictions of attempted battery and unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon. Finds no evidence of pretext in the state’s strike of venireperson Bard, the only African-American.

Joey Addison v. State of Indiana
49S05-1105-CR-267
Criminal. Uses the fundamental error doctrine to examine Addison’s Batson claim on appeal. The state’s mischaracterization of Turner’s voir dire testimony, its failure to engage Turner in any meaningful voir dire examination to explore his alleged undue reliance on the testimony of professionals, and the comparative juror analysis, when taken collectively, leave the firm impression that the state’s proffered explanation for striking venireperson Turner was a mere pretext based on race, making a fair trial impossible. Remands for a new trial.

Antwon Abbott v. State of Indiana
34S02-1202-CR-110
Criminal. Remands to the trial court to revise Abbott’s sentence from the maximum 20 years to 12 years for possession of cocaine as a Class B felony. But for the police officer’s choice of location in stopping the car in which Abbott was a passenger, he would have received no more than the maximum three-year sentence for possessing less than three grams of cocaine. Justices David and Dickson dissent.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ernesto Gutierrez v. State of Indiana
44A03-1106-CR-257
Criminal. Reverses convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting. The trial court erred in admitting improper vouching testimony that invaded the province of the jury and prejudiced Gutierrez’s substantial rights. Remands for a new trial.

In the Matter of the Adoption of M.S.T.; R.P.M.T. v. C.K. and J.P. (NFP)
02A03-1106-AD-258
Adoption. Affirms grant of petition for C.K. and J.P. to adopt M.S.T.

Carol Showalter v. Donald Showalter (NFP)
20A03-1107-DR-332
Domestic relation. Remands for the trial court to explain its calculation of the parenting time credit and, if necessary, to recalculate the parenting time credit and father’s child support obligation. The trial court should also address the issue of whether son Brandt’s participation in ROTC should be credited toward his share of post-secondary education expenses.

Brent Goodman v. GMH Snyder Farms, Inc. (NFP)
53A05-1110-CT-531
Civil tort. Affirms order granting a motion to transfer venue from Monroe County to Montgomery County filed by GMH Snyder Farms.

Chuck W. Adams v. Mauro Chavez, M.D., Prison Health Services, Gil Kaufman, Craig Underwood, Dean Reiger (NFP)
49A05-1104-CT-218
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of Chavez and other defendants on a complaint for medical malpractice.

LaDawn D. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1106-CR-271
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony battery.

Scott W. Bishop v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1108-CR-797, 48A05-1108-CR-441
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

James Ingram v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1106-CR-578
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Philip Gregory Yeary v. State of Indiana (NFP)
78A01-1108-CR-388
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Jeremy L. Hopkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1104-CR-342
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Michael Dunfee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A03-1106-CR-279
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony operating a motor vehicle while driving privileges are forfeited for life, Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated in a manner that endangers a person, and being a habitual substance offender. Reverses order that Dunfee pay restitution.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT