ILNews

Opinions Jan. 10, 2011

January 10, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Francisco Onan Delao v. State of Indiana
20A05-1003-CR-182
Criminal. Affirms four convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine. Delao waived any error in the admission of the audio recordings of certain cocaine transactions because he failed to present a sufficient record for appellate review. His sentence is appropriate in light of his character and offenses.

Brian S. Christie v. State of Indiana
33A01-1006-CR-306
Criminal. Affirms order revoking Christie’s community corrections placement and order he serve the entirety of his remaining sentence at the Department of Correction. The trial court’s judicial notice and its dispositional order were proper.

State of Ohio Conviction Against Mickey Shawn Gambler
02A04-1008-CR-509
Criminal. Reverses order that Gambler be removed from the Indiana sex offender registry. The trial court erred by not providing notice to the appropriate parties or holding a hearing. Remands for the trial court to dismiss the case without prejudice subject to further proceedings in the event Gambler files a sufficient petition.

Anthony Taylor v. State of Indiana
49A02-1008-PC-949
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for permission to file a belated appeal of the denial of Taylor’s petition for post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court abused its discretion in denying Taylor the relief he sought under Trial Rule 72(E). Remands for the post-conviction court to allow him to file a notice of appeal.

Kevin D. Ables v. Wray J. Ables (NFP)
18A05-1002-DR-144
Domestic relation. Affirms post-dissolution order.

Marshall Sims v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-CR-555
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

George Burnett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1002-CR-182
Criminal. Affirms order denying Burnett’s motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Mrtyrone Demon Metcalf v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1002-CR-69
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder, felony murder in the perpetration of a robbery, and Class B felony robbery.

Justin Trevor Stetler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1004-CR-312
Criminal. Stetler pleaded guilty to Class B felony attempted child molesting. Reverses a restriction in the sentencing order and remands for it to be deleted and impose conditions as stated in the language. Affirms the trial court’s finding of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and his 14-year sentence of 10 years executed and four years suspended and served on probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

The Indiana Supreme Court granted four transfers and denied 24 for the week ending Jan. 7.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT