ILNews

Opinions Jan. 10, 2014

January 10, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
The following opinion was issued after IL deadline Thursday.
Julio Cesar Chavarria v. United States of America
11-3549
Criminal. Affirms District Court order dismissing Chavarria’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that led to his deportation after conviction of cocaine distribution charges. The panel found the distinction between affirmative misadvice and failure to advise does not evade the non-retroactive ruling of Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010).

Indiana Court of Appeals
Luis Antonio Palacio v. Raquel Villavicencio (NFP)
49A02-1305-DR-397
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of father’s request to modify child support.

In the Matter of the Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of D.C. & A.R. (Minor Children), and T.R. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A05-1306-JT-291
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

In Re the Marriage of James Barnum Gregory v. Ellen Davies Gregory (NFP)
49A05-1305-DR-205
Domestic relation. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands for recalculation of husband’s child support and educational support obligations.

Patrick Palmer v. State of Indiana (NFP)

03A04-1306-CR-271
Criminal. Affirms 25-year aggregate sentence for convictions of Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury, Class D felony attempted obstruction of justice, Class A misdemeanors invasion of privacy and battery, and a habitual offender enhancement.

James Christian Warner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A01-1305-CR-213
Criminal. Affirms 20-year sentence with two years suspended for conviction of Class B felony possession of methamphetamine.
 
Joshua Batchelor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1306-CR-259
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation.

In Re the Termination of Parent-Child Relationship of B.W., A.W., W.S., & U.S., B.W., and J.S. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
33A01-1306-JT-270
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

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 Friday.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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

  2. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  3. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

  4. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

  5. This article proved very enlightening. Right ahead of sitting the LSAT for the first time, I felt a sense of relief that a score of 141 was admitted to an Indiana Law School and did well under unique circumstances. While my GPA is currently 3.91 I fear standardized testing and hope that I too will get a good enough grade for acceptance here at home. Thanks so much for this informative post.

ADVERTISEMENT