ILNews

Opinions Jan. 14, 2011

January 14, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
John M. Stephenson v. Bill Wilson, Superintendent of Indiana State Prison
09-2924
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Theresa L. Springmann.
Order. Petition for rehearing en banc is denied. Panel previously reversed District Court’s finding that Stephenson received ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorney didn’t object to Stephenson’s wearing a stun belt in court. Judges Rovner, Williams, and Hamilton dissent.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Indiana Spine Group, P.C. v. International Entertainment Consultants
93A02-1007-EX-764
Civil. Reverses dismissal of Indiana Spine Group’s application for adjustment of claim with the Worker’s Compensation Board. Indiana Code Section 22-3-3-3 doesn’t apply to Indiana Spine’s claim. Remands for further proceedings.

Orlando Quezare v. Byrider Finance, Inc.
29A02-1008-PL-944
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment for Byrider Finance on Quezare’s suit that his bonus payments were “wages” under the Wage Payment Statute and Byrider violated the statute by not paying him his bonuses within 10 days of the date they were earned. The bonuses were not wages for the purposes of the statute because they were not directly related to the amount of time Quezare worked, were not necessarily paid regularly, and the bonus program was discretionary.

Alexander Orta v. State of Indiana
71A05-1004-CR-210
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for felony murder, Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a controlled substance in the blood, and Class C felony failure to stop at the scene of an accident resulting in death of another person. The trial court acted within its discretion with regard to each of Orta’s alleged errors, the trial court properly applied the Indiana Supreme Court’s opinion in Sanchez, and Orta’s sentence is appropriate.

Christopher Brian Neal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
07A01-1007-CR-331
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and aggregate 65-year sentence for felony murder and Class B felony robbery.

Nanci Lacy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1005-OV-528
Local ordinance violation. Affirms permanent injunction order impounding any animal Lacy owned and prohibiting her from owning or keeping an animal in Marion County.

Gregory Withers, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1006-CR-419
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony nonsupport of a child.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of N.J.; J.J. and A.D. v. I.D.C.S., St. Joseph County office (NFP)
71A04-1004-JT-209
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Douglas P. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A03-1004-CR-222
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to sever child molesting charges from sexual misconduct with a minor charges.

Jay F. Vermillion v. Indiana State Prison Disciplinary Body and Westville Control Unit (NFP)
46A03-1008-SC-409
Small claims. Affirms grant of motion to dismiss Vermillion’s complaint alleging his disciplinary sanction and the confiscation of his television were in violation of Department of Correction policy.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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