ILNews

Opinions Feb. 5, 2013

February 5, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Ignacio Perez v. State of Indiana
20A03-1206-CR-247
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress. Finds the detention, arrest and search incident to the arrest were reasonable and did not violate Perez’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The dog sniff outside his residence was reasonable and there was no violation of his rights under the Indiana Constitution. Remands for retrial.

Keiyun L. Mays v. State of Indiana
45A04-1205-CR-287
Criminal. Affirms 15-year sentence for Class B felony criminal confinement and finding that Mays is a sexually violent predator. Mays failed to establish that the process used to determine his SVP status constituted fundamental error, the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him, and that the state provided insufficient evidence to sustain the SVP finding.

Vance R. Pace v. State of Indiana
20A03-1206-PC-378
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief. Pace’s trial counsel’s performance was deficient and Pace was prejudiced by that. Remands for a new trial.  

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of D.B., Minor Child, and His Mother, J.B.: J.B. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
87A01-1207-JT-336
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Donald Tatum v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1206-PC-331
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Eddie Rogers v. State of Indiana (NFP)

02A05-1206-CR-331
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

Alfredo Lopez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1207-CR-346
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony domestic battery.

Joshua W. Joyner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1208-CR-618
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony theft.

Jereamy M. Barnes v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A05-1204-CR-209
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting.

Shabbir Hussain v. Syed Ali (NFP)
85A02-1208-MF-629
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms denial of Hussain’s petition to execute and deliver sheriff’s deed and grant of a similar competing petition filed by Ali.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of L.R., Minor Child, and Her Father, R.R.: R.R. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
76A03-1206-JT-286
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: M.A.P. (Minor Child) and M.L.P. (Father) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, Allen County Office (NFP)
02A03-1206-JT-254
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

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

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

  2. Mr. Straw, I hope you prevail in the fight. Please show us fellow American's that there is a way to fight the corrupted justice system and make them an example that you and others will not be treated unfairly. I hope you the best and good luck....

  3. @ President Snow - Nah, why try to fix something that ain't broken??? You do make an excellent point. I am sure some Mickey or Minnie Mouse will take Ruckers seat, I wonder how his retirement planning is coming along???

  4. Can someone please explain why Judge Barnes, Judge Mathias and Chief Judge Vaidik thought it was OK to re weigh the evidence blatantly knowing that by doing so was against the rules and went ahead and voted in favor of the father? I would love to ask them WHY??? I would also like to ask the three Supreme Justices why they thought it was OK too.

  5. How nice, on the day of my car accident on the way to work at the Indiana Supreme Court. Unlike the others, I did not steal any money or do ANYTHING unethical whatsoever. I am suing the Indiana Supreme Court and appealed the failure of the district court in SDIN to protect me. I am suing the federal judge because she failed to protect me and her abandonment of jurisdiction leaves her open to lawsuits because she stripped herself of immunity. I am a candidate for Indiana Supreme Court justice, and they imposed just enough sanction so that I am made ineligible. I am asking the 7th Circuit to remove all of them and appoint me as the new Chief Justice of Indiana. That's what they get for dishonoring my sacrifice and and violating the ADA in about 50 different ways.

ADVERTISEMENT