ILNews

Opinions Jan. 25, 2013

January 25, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
The following opinion was released after IL deadline Thursday.

Carlin Iltzsch v. State of Indiana
49S02-1301-CR-57
Criminal. Reverses Court of Appeals order vacating a judgment of restitution against a criminal defendant, holding that such orders may be reviewed by the court and remanded for rehearing when evidence is insufficient to support the order.

Indiana Court of Appeals
David Delagrange v. State of Indiana
49A04-1203-CR-144
Criminal. Reversed conviction of four counts of Class C felony attempted child exploitation and remanded for further proceedings. Ruled Delagrange’s act of secretly photographing minor girls’ underwear did not meet the Indiana statute’s definition of “child exploitation” because the girls did not intentionally expose themselves for the purpose of satisfying or arousing sexual desires of another.

Robertson Fowler v. State of Indiana
49A05-1202-PC-68
Criminal. Affirms on rehearing earlier denial of post-conviction relief for Robertson Fowler  sentenced to a maximum of 35 years in prison for his conviction of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon with an enhancement as a habitual offender. Because Fowler received the benefit of charges against him being dropped when he pleaded guilty, his conviction was not in conflict with the Indiana Supreme Court’s subsequent ruling in Mills v. State, 868 N.E.2d 446, 450 (Ind. 2007) or a differing Court of Appeals ruling, Dugan v. State, 976 N.E.2d 1248, 1249.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of: D.T., (Minor Child), and T.S. (Father) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services
49A02-1205-JT-420

Juvenile. Affirms termination of a juvenile father’s parental rights, holding that his due process rights were not violated when the trial court did not appoint a guardian ad litem for him.

David McCombs v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1111-PC-658
Post conviction. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief involving 62-year sentence on charges of murder, theft and carrying handgun without a license.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of D.C., Minor Child; A.R., Mother, and S.C., Father v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services, Lake County CASA (NFP)
45A03-1204-JT-172
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Dale D. Engle v. State of Indiana (NFP)
58A04-1205-CR-244
Criminal. Affirms 12-year sentence for conviction of Class B felony dealing in a controlled substance.

Charles Kingery v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-317
Affirms 55-year murder sentence following resentencing on a reduced felony robbery charge.

Ricky J. Thurston v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1204-CR-289
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony rape and adjudication as a habitual offender.

D.J. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1206-JV-490
Criminal. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent for what would be Class D felony theft and Class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm if committed by an adult.

Paul Hoffert, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1205-CR-273
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in work release.

Kip Hurt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1206-CR-286
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor battery.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions by IL deadline Friday. U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline Friday.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Oh, the name calling was not name calling, it was merely social commentary making this point, which is on the minds of many, as an aside to the article's focus: https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100111082327AAmlmMa Or, if you prefer a local angle, I give you exhibit A in that analysis of viva la difference: http://fox59.com/2015/03/16/moed-appears-on-house-floor-says-hes-not-resigning/

  2. Too many attorneys take their position as a license to intimidate and threaten non attorneys in person and by mail. Did find it ironic that a reader moved to comment twice on this article could not complete a paragraph without resorting to insulting name calling (rethuglican) as a substitute for reasoned discussion. Some people will never get the point this action should have made.

  3. People have heard of Magna Carta, and not the Provisions of Oxford & Westminster. Not that anybody really cares. Today, it might be considered ethnic or racial bias to talk about the "Anglo Saxon common law." I don't even see the word English in the blurb above. Anyhow speaking of Edward I-- he was famously intolerant of diversity himself viz the Edict of Expulsion 1290. So all he did too like making parliament a permanent institution-- that all must be discredited. 100 years from now such commemorations will be in the dustbin of history.

  4. Oops, I meant discipline, not disciple. Interesting that those words share such a close relationship. We attorneys are to be disciples of the law, being disciplined to serve the law and its source, the constitutions. Do that, and the goals of Magna Carta are advanced. Do that not and Magna Carta is usurped. Do that not and you should be disciplined. Do that and you should be counted a good disciple. My experiences, once again, do not reveal a process that is adhering to the due process ideals of Magna Carta. Just the opposite, in fact. Braveheart's dying rebel (for a great cause) yell comes to mind.

  5. It is not a sign of the times that many Ind licensed attorneys (I am not) would fear writing what I wrote below, even if they had experiences to back it up. Let's take a minute to thank God for the brave Baron's who risked death by torture to tell the government that it was in the wrong. Today is a career ruination that whistleblowers risk. That is often brought on by denial of licenses or disciple for those who dare speak truth to power. Magna Carta says truth rules power, power too often claims that truth matters not, only Power. Fight such power for the good of our constitutional republics. If we lose them we have only bureaucratic tyranny to pass onto our children. Government attorneys, of all lawyers, should best realize this and work to see our patrimony preserved. I am now a government attorney (once again) in Kansas, and respecting the rule of law is my passion, first and foremost.

ADVERTISEMENT