ILNews

Opinions July 20, 2012

July 20, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Bradley M. Shideler v. Michael J. Astrue, commissioner of Social Security
11-3284
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Robert L.
Miller Jr.
Civil. Affirms denial of application for Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. The administrative law judge adequately evaluated Shideler’s credibility. Whatever his current condition is, the ALJ’s decision finding that he was not disabled as of March 31, 2000, is supported by substantial evidence.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Devon D. Dokes, Jr. v. State of Indiana
71A03-1111-CR-503
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation for being a felon in possession of a handgun. Because the difference between the burden of proof required to convict someone of a crime and the burden of proof required to revoke probation, the court could revoke probation after finding Dokes not guilty based on the same evidence.

James Lee Paul v. State of Indiana
82A05-1111-CR-634
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for murder. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing certain evidence as the danger to the officers and the tenants, coupled with the tampering of evidence, was an exigent circumstance that made it impractical for the officers to obtain an arrest warrant before arresting Paul.

Bradley D. Haub v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentences stemming from three different causes for Class B felony aiding burglary, two counts of Class C felony forgery, Class D felony auto theft, and Class D felony theft.

Anthony Lee Leturgez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1112-CR-1105
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor battery.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of D.P. and P.S. (Minor Children); A.P. (Father) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
03A01-1107-JT-309
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of B.B. and L.H. (Minor Children); Lo.H. (Mother) v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1111-JT-1101
Juvenile termination. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Jamey Wayne Thomas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1110-CR-1066
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony operating a motor vehicle while privileges were forfeited for life.
 

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. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT