ILNews

Opinions Feb. 25, 2014

February 25, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
James Kindred, Thomas Kindred, and Sam Kindred v. Betty Townsend and Harmon Crone
60A01-1304-PL-156
Civil plenary. Dismisses interlocutory appeal as untimely. Finds the arguments the Kindreds raised in appealing the denial of their motion to dissolve were based on information that was available when the trial court granted the preliminary injunction six months prior. Still, the COA notes it has ruled only that the Kindreds forfeited their right to an interlocutory appeal by failing to timely file. The Kindreds may yet attack the trial court’s interlocutory orders on appeal from the final judgment.  

John R. Pugsley v. State of Indiana (NFP)  
05A02-1306-CR-517
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of methamphetamine and Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

Derek A. Griffith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
89A01-1307-PC-300
Post conviction. Affirms denial of relief from convictions of Class C felony attempted burglary and finding of habitual offender.

Mark A. Petry v. State of Indiana (NFP) 
63A01-1306-CR-279
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct, Class D felony sexual battery and Class D felony criminal confinement.

James R. Willey v. State of Indiana (NFP) 
06A05-1306-PC-268
Post conviction. Affirms in part and reverses in part denial of relief from convictions of felony murder and conspiracy to commit burglary, vacating a 50-year sentence on the latter charge because trial counsel failed to raise the argument that the convictions violated the prohibition against double jeopardy.

In Re the Visitation of L.W., D.W. v. G.W. and C.W. (NFP)
71A03-1308-JM-300
Juvenile. Dismisses as moot father D.W.’s appeal of a grandparent visitation order.

Angelo A. Liali v. Patsy Liali (NFP) 
34A02-1307-DR-640
Affirms order denying Angelo Liali’s motion to modify college support obligation and affirms indirect contempt finding for refusal to pay.

Joshua Batchelor v. State of Indiana (NFP) 
15A01-1305-CR-274
Criminal. Affirms order denying release of cash bond and money seized in a search of Batchelor’s home.

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

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT