ILNews

Opinions July 24, 2012

July 24, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Jeffrey D. Kirkland v. United States of America
11-2507
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Jon E. DeGuilio.
Civil. Reverses District Court’s conclusion that an enhancement of Kirkland’s sentence under the Armed Criminal Career Act was still appropriate based on his remaining three convictions for violent felonies. Court may only consider Shepard-approved sources in determining whether prior offenses occurred on separate occasions under 18 U.S.C. Section 924(e)(1). Based on the record, the appellate court can’t conclude that Kirkland’s robbery and burglary offenses – which were on the same day – occurred on separate occasions. Remands for resentencing.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Kelvin T. Brown v. Indianapolis Housing Agency
49A05-1111-CT-648
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment for IHA on Brown’s lawsuit for malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The IHA had a qualified privilege to report Brown’s suspected criminal conduct. The evidence does not show that the privilege was abused, and the privilege bars his claims.

Keith Crawford v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1112-CR-648
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Evonne Carrillo v. Review Board of the Ind. Dept. of Workforce Development and Skozen & Skozen, LLP (NFP)
93A02-1108-EX-794
Agency appeal. Affirms the review board’s decision that Carrillo was discharged from her job for just cause was reasonable.

Latine Davidson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A04-1112-PC-695
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Roy L. Streicher v. State of Indiana (NFP)
69A05-1111-CR-603
Criminal. Remands with instructions to vacate the Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated conviction, and affirms sentence for Class D felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a previous operating while intoxicated conviction within the last five years and Class A misdemeanor domestic battery with injury.

Asa G. Wisler v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A05-1109-CR-492
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle with an ACE of 0.08 or more.

Alan Weir v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1201-CR-22
Criminal. Affirms trial court order Weir serve the balance of his home detention sentence and his previously suspended 2-year sentence in the Department of Correction.

Larry Edward Ruble, Jr., Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Natasha Ruble, Deceased v. Lori Thompson, M.D. (NFP)
53A05-1109-CT-488
Civil tort. Affirms judgment on a defense verdict in a medical malpractice action.

Jordan Guess v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1112-CR-620
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion for jail time credit.

John W. Breedlove v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A02-1111-CR-1116
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine.

Justin Holman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1112-CR-1138
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony robbery and one count of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license.

Jeffrey Scott Brooks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1111-CR-1095
Criminal. Affirms admittance of hearsay testimony at an evidentiary hearing on a probation violation.

Timothy L. Gabbard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1112-CR-1174
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following guilty plea to receiving stolen property and admitting to violating probation for the third time.

Chanda Banner v. Charles Kincaid (NFP)
82A05-1202-DR-93
Domestic relation. Affirms determination of Kincaid’s child support arrearage.

Dwayne Gaines v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1201-CR-12
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class C misdemeanor indecent exposure and remands with instructions to vacate. Affirms conviction of Class D felony criminal confinement.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I enrolled America's 1st tax-free Health Savings Account (HSA) so you can trust me. I bet 1/3 of my clients were lawyers because they love tax-free deposits, growth and withdrawals or total tax freedom. Most of the time (always) these clients are uninformed about insurance law. Employer-based health insurance is simple if you read the policy. It says, Employers (lawyers) and employees who are working 30-hours-per-week are ELIGIBLE for insurance. Then I show the lawyer the TERMINATION clause which states: When you are no longer ELIGIBLE! Then I ask a closing question (sales term) to the lawyer which is, "If you have a stroke or cancer and become too sick to work can you keep your health insurance?" If the lawyer had dependent children they needed a "Dependent Conversion Privilege" in case their child got sick or hurt which the lawyers never had. Lawyers are pretty easy sales. Save premium, eliminate taxes and build wealth!

  2. Ok, so cheap laughs made about the Christian Right. hardiharhar ... All kidding aside, it is Mohammad's followers who you should be seeking divine protection from. Allahu Akbar But progressives are in denial about that, even as Europe crumbles.

  3. Father's rights? What about a mothers rights? A child's rights? Taking a child from the custody of the mother for political reasons! A miscarriage of justice! What about the welfare of the child? Has anyone considered parent alienation, the father can't erase the mother from the child's life. This child loves the mother and the home in Wisconsin, friends, school and family. It is apparent the father hates his ex-wife more than he loves his child! I hope there will be a Guardian Ad Litem, who will spend time with and get to know the child, BEFORE being brainwashed by the father. This is not just a child! A little person with rights and real needs, a stable home and a parent that cares enough to let this child at least finish the school year, where she is happy and comfortable! Where is the justice?

  4. "The commission will review applications and interview qualified candidates in March and April." Riiiiiight. Would that be the same vaulted process that brought us this result done by "qualified candidates"? http://www.theindianalawyer.com/justices-deny-transfer-to-child-custody-case/PARAMS/article/42774 Perhaps a lottery system more like the draft would be better? And let us not limit it to Indiana attorneys so as to give the untainted a fighting chance?

  5. Steal a little, and they put you in jail. Steal a lot, and they make you king. Bob Dylan ala Samuel Johnson. I had a very similar experience trying to hold due process trampling bureaucrats responsible under the law. Consider this quote and commentary:"'When the president does it, that means it is not illegal,' [Richard] Nixon told his interviewer. Those words were largely seen by the American public -- which continued to hold the ex-president in low esteem -- as a symbol of his unbowed arrogance. Most citizens still wanted to believe that no American citizen, not even the president, is above the law." BWHaahaaahaaa!!!! http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/When-the-president-does-it-that-means-it-is-not-illegal.html

ADVERTISEMENT