ILNews

Opinions Jan. 19, 2012

January 19, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court
Chrysler Group, LLC v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and T.A., et al.
93S02-1109-EX-565
Agency appeal. Affirms award of benefits to Chrysler employees offered a buyout. By Chrysler’s own words — to Congress and its own employees — Enhanced Voluntary Termination of Employment Program was part of a company-wide effort intended to avert twenty-nine manufacturing plant closures, twenty-two parts depot closures, and 53,000 layoffs. The board’s conclusion on this issue of ultimate fact was reasonable.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Tommy D. Alfrey v. State of Indiana
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=2012/january/01191203cjb.pdf
54A01-1104-CR-169
Criminal. Affirms convictions in three separate cause numbers of Class D felony residential entry, theft, escape and residential entry, Class A misdemeanor trespass, and revocation of probation. Intoxication is not a defense and Alfrey’s situation does not fall under the two narrow exceptions outlined in I.C. 35-41-3-5.

Fernando Contreras v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1106-CR-255
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty pleas to Class B felony burglary and Class C felony escape.

Beth E. Myers v. Rising Sun-Ohio County Community School Corporation (NFP)
58A05-1104-CT-193
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for the school corporation on Myers’ complaint asserting she was wrongfully discharged in retaliation for her workers' compensation claim.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.T.; K.A. (Father) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, and Lake County CASA (NFP)
45A03-1105-JT-207
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Raymond Benjamin Gray v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1106-CR-327
Criminal. Affirms sentence for convictions of Class C felony criminal recklessness and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Marie Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

67A01-1107-CR-306
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony burglary and Class D felony theft.

Stacey L. Certain v. State of Indiana (NFP)
91A02-1106-CR-546
Criminal. Reverses sentence for Class C felony operating a motor vehicle after forfeiture of license for life and remands with instructions to resentence Certain to the advisory sentence of four years.

Bart A. Dewald v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1010-CR-541
Criminal.  Affirms sentences for conspiracy to commit aggravated battery, criminal confinement, intimidation, pointing a firearm, and criminal recklessness, and remands with instructions to vacate one conviction of conspiracy to commit aggravated battery and resentence Dewald in accordance with the opinion. Judge Baker concurs in part and dissents in part.

I.M. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1101-JV-41
Juvenile. Grants rehearing and affirms original decision reversing the juvenile court’s order of restitution. Remanded for a new restitution hearing.

Dominique Guyton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1107-PC-724
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT