ILNews

Opinions Jan. 12, 2012

January 12, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Michael Redmond and Charles Avery Jr.
10-1947, 10-3914
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Criminal. Affirms denial of Avery’s request to withdraw his guilty plea to crack cocaine distribution, the calculation of the crack cocaine quantity attributed to him and his sentence. Remands for the District Court to reconsider Redmond’s sentence following a guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute in excess of 50 grams of cocaine base in light of United States v. Corner.

Indiana Supreme Court
Keith M. Ramsey, M.D., The Methodist Hospitals, Inc. v. Shella Moore
45S05-1105-CT-281
Civil tort. Holds that because the trial court’s order dismissing the portion of Moore’s proposed complaint dealing with the death of the fetus but refusing to dismiss her complaint in its entirety based on the lateness of her submission is not a final appealable judgment, there is no subject matter jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The trial court order did not dispose of all the claims as to all parties.

Thomas Dexter v. State of Indiana
79S05-1106-CR-367
Criminal. Reverses Dexter’s habitual-offender sentencing enhancement and holds that an unsigned judgment is not sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the fact of a prior conviction. Holds that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment doesn’t bar the state from retrying Dexter on the habitual offender enhancement. Summarily affirms the Indiana Court of Appeals in all other respects.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jason Quinn v. Accurate Builders (NFP)
93A02-1108-EX-698
Agency appeal. Affirms decision of the Full Worker’s Compensation Board denying application for adjustment of claim.

Robert Weybright v. Kathy Weybright n/k/a Kathy Scaggs (NFP)
43A03-1105-DR-191
Domestic relation. Affirms determination that Kathy Weybright was not in contempt of a court order, that Robert Weybright maintain health insurance for the parties’ minor daughter, and that Kathy retain sole custody of the daughter. Remands for the court to modify its order so that Robert isn’t required to reimburse Kathy for certain bills.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT