ILNews

Opinions July 15, 2011

July 15, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Estate of Wilgus S. Gibbs, Sr.
81A01-1011-ES-560
Estate. Affirms grant of summary judgment in favor of Wilgus Gibbs Jr., individually and as a personal representative of the estate and executor of the will of Wilgus Gibbs Sr. Gibbs Sr.’s granddaughters failed to rebut the presumption of regularity in the execution of his will that is established by the self-proving clause. There is also no evidence of undue influence or that the will was the result of a mistake or fraud.

Charles Meek v. State of Indiana
49A02-1009-CR-964
Criminal. Affirms denial of Meek’s motion to suppress evidence discovered during a warrantless search of him during a Terry stop of his car. Meek’s admittance to smoking marijuana earlier in the day and to having a handgun on him, along with the police officer’s failure to find the source of the odor in the car and the absence of marijuana on his passenger, supported the subsequent and more thorough pat-down search of Meek that led to the discovery of contraband.

Myron Pryor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-1176
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for permission to file a belated notice of appeal.

Shamar D. Shelton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1010-CR-571
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony receiving stolen property.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.M.C.; A.C. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
28A01-1102-JT-81
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Meshach Berry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1011-CR-1218
Criminal. Reverses denial of permission to file a belated notice of appeal. Remands for further proceedings.

Jason L. Clark v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0810-CR-949
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder, Class D felony criminal recklessness, and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Gary Singleton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1010-CR-575
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Rodney R. Jett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
24A01-1012-CR-24
Criminal. Affirms sentence of six years for Class C felony battery.

Aaron Fromer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
03A04-1008-CR-520
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for additional credit time.

Jeffrey Cole v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1011-CR-1215
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Shane Cummings v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1009-CR-537
Criminal. Affirms convictions of five counts of child molesting – one as a Class C felony, three as Class A felonies, and one as a Class B felony.

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. If real money was spent on this study, what a shame. And if some air-head professor tries to use this to advance a career, pity the poor student. I am approaching a time that i (and others around me) should be vigilant. I don't think I'm anywhere near there yet, but seeing the subject I was looking forward to something I might use to look for some benchmarks. When finally finding my way to the hidden questionnaire all I could say to myself was...what a joke. Those are open and obvious signs of any impaired lawyer (or non-lawyer, for that matter), And if one needs a checklist to discern those tell-tale signs of impairment at any age, one shouldn't be practicing law. Another reason I don't regret dropping my ABA membership some number of years ago.

  2. The case should have been spiked. Give the kid a break. He can serve and maybe die for Uncle Sam and can't have a drink? Wow. And they won't even let him defend himself. What a gross lack of prosecutorial oversight and judgment. WOW

  3. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  4. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT