ILNews

Opinions July 13, 2010

July 13, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Michael Akens v. State of Indiana
49A05-0912-CR-687
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following guilty plea to child molesting. The trial court’s statement that Akens could appeal his sentence wasn’t made until after the court had accepted the plea agreement and entered Akens’ sentence. The agreement included his express waiver of his right to appeal his sentence.

Deborah Edwards v. State of Indiana
49A02-0911-CR-1093
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony criminal recklessness. Evidence of a defendant’s absence from a crime scene is not an “alibi” defense. It is a rebuttal of the prosecution’s contention the defendant was present and thus capable of committing the crime. Remands for a new trial.

Randy Allen Long v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-0909-CR-903
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony possession of marijuana and Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

John C. Cole, Jr. v. Patrick V. Baker (NFP)
49A02-0910-CV-960
Civil. Reverses summary judgment for attorney Patrick Baker after he refused to return money Cole paid him as a retainer.

A.E. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1001-JV-17
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for committing what would be Class B and Class C felony child molesting if committed by an adult.

Ronald Wright v. State of Indiana (NFP)
46A03-0912-CR-594
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct erroneous sentence.

Douglas K. Huffnagel v. Christopher F. Cline (NFP)
20A05-0911-CV-662
Civil. Affirms grant of Cline’s motion for a directed verdict in favor of Cline on Huffnagel’s claims for negligence and injuries following an automobile accident.

Timothy Charles Wakefield v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A04-0911-CR-647
Criminal. Remands case for a sentencing statement that clearly explains its finding of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and its reasons for imposing consecutive sentences following guilty plea to Class D felonies criminal recklessness, maintaining a common nuisance, dealing in marijuana, and possession of a controlled substance.

William D. Baxter v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0908-PC-724
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Otis A. Tate, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1003-CR-138
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony forgery.

William Kerr v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-0911-CR-639
Criminal. Affirms conviction of operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a Class A misdemeanor.

D.C.B. Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; P.B. and Da.B. v. Marion County DCS and Child Advocates (NFP)
49A02-0912-JV-1204
Juvenile. Affirms finding D.C.B. is a child in need of services.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of K.I. and R.I.; K.K. and C.I. v. IDCS (NFP)
20A03-0912-JV-562
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Andy Zulu v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-CR-1113
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for Class B felonies rape, and criminal deviate conduct.

Donald Johnston, et al. v. Carl W. Johnston, et al. (NFP)
43A03-0912-CV-568
Civil. Affirms the trial court’s judgment and order for distribution of sale proceeds.

James Gilman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A05-0908-PC-462
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands with instructions to enter an amended sentencing order.

Kenneth McClung v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1275
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony aggravated battery.

V.B. v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Daimler Chrysler Co. LLC (NFP)
93A02-0911-EX-1140
Civil. Affirms dismissal of V.B.’s appeal of a determination that she was not eligible for benefits.

Lewis Vasquez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1002-CR-135
Criminal. Reverses sentence following guilty plea to Class B felonies criminal confinement and burglary while armed with a deadly weapon. Remands for re-sentencing.

John B. Felder v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-0902-CV-156
Civil. Affirms judgment in favor of the state and Department of Correction employees in Felder’s complaint regarding events that allegedly occurred while he was at Pendleton Correctional Facility.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT