ILNews

Opinions July 25, 2013

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

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Jama Mire and Hassan Rafle
12-2792, 12-2793
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Criminal. Affirms both men’s convictions of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cathinone; affirms Mire’s additional convictions of knowingly using or maintaining a place for the purpose of distributing and using cathinone; and possession with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing cathinone. Rejects claims that that their due process rights were violated because they were not given fair warning that the possession of “khat” may be illegal; and that the District Court erred under Daubert in admitting government expert witness testimony regarding khat plants that were seized at the coffee house and tested for cathinone, a controlled substance. Rejects Mire’s argument that his conviction for conspiracy to distribute khat and his conviction for maintaining a place for the distribution or use of khat violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jason King v. State of Indiana
64A04-1209-CR-464
Criminal. Affirms conviction and 45-year sentence for attempted murder. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying King’s motion to suppress evidence regarding his confession.

Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Grant and Blackford Counties v. M Jewell, LLC, Auditor of Grant County, Indiana and Treasurer of Grant County, Indiana
27A05-1211-MI-593
Miscellaneous. Reverses order denying Farmers Mutual’s petition to set aside a tax deed issued to M Jewell, LLC. The denial of the petition was clearly erroneous because it was based on the conclusion that the auditor’s failure to search his records was, in essence, harmless. Remands with instructions to grant the petition.

Eddie G. Showley, Executor, Estate of Phillip J. Showley v. Tracey Kelsey, Individually and as Successor Personal Representative of the Estate of Sonya Sue Showley
09A04-1301-ES-22
Estate, supervised. Affirms order distributing the wrongful death proceeds to Tracey Kelsey, individually and as successor personal representative of the estate of Sonya Sue Showley. The trial court properly applied the law and thus, did not abuse its discretion by applying Rhode Island statutory law to the distribution of the wrongful death settlement. Judge Brown dissents.

Jason E. Morales v. State of Indiana

82A05-1302-CR-72
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for placement in the Vanderburgh County Forensic Diversion Program. Concludes that the trial court’s denial of sex offender Morales’ petition was not an abuse of discretion because there was no final administrative decision for the trial court to review and that, even if the program had explicitly rejected Morales, its decision would not have been arbitrary or capricious because Morales was ineligible under the statute. Finally, even assuming solely for argument’s sake that Morales had been eligible under the statute, Indiana counties have the ability to determine the scope of their forensic diversion programs.

Bradley T. Steidle v. State of Indiana (NFP)

12A04-1212-CR-623
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated and remands with instructions to vacate Steidle’s Class A misdemeanor conviction and sentence and enter a judgment and an appropriate sentence for operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a Class C misdemeanor.

Virgil Pyles v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1301-CR-94
Criminal. Reverses calculation of the remaining balance of Pyles’ suspended sentence upon revocation of his probation. The trial court is directed to amend its sentencing order on petition to revoke to reflect that as of Nov. 29, 2012, Pyles had 609 days left to serve on his original suspended sentence.

Lorraine V. Kucki, Michael J. Kucki, Michael R. Bradash, Ziese & Sons Excavating, Inc.: Construction Services.; Biesen Excavating, Inc. and V & H Excavating, Inc. v. Jessica Archer (NFP)
45A03-1210-CT-422
Civil tort. Affirms order denying the Kuckis’ and other defendants’ joint motion for summary judgment, contending that the trial court erred in ordering the substitution of a plaintiff with no damages as the real party in interest.

Mark R. Hurst v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1209-CR-391
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony robbery and Class D felony criminal confinement.

Na-Son D. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1210-CR-872
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentences for two counts of murder and one count of robbery as a Class A felony.

Donald R. Smitty v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A05-1212-CR-610
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated causing endangerment and sentence. Remands for the limited purpose of correcting the record to show that the operating while intoxicated charge is enhanced by the three-year sentence that was imposed in light of the habitual substance-offender finding.

Clarissa Brewer v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1212-CR-633
Criminal. Affirms two convictions of Class D felony neglect of a dependent. Concludes that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing community service in lieu of fines and costs and by improperly delegating Brewer’s ability to pay fines and costs to the probation department. Remands with instructions.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It really doesn't matter what the law IS, if law enforcement refuses to take reports (or take them seriously), if courts refuse to allow unrepresented parties to speak (especially in Small Claims, which is supposedly "informal"). It doesn't matter what the law IS, if constituents are unable to make effective contact or receive any meaningful response from their representatives. Two of our pets were unnecessarily killed; court records reflect that I "abandoned" them. Not so; when I was denied one of them (and my possessions, which by court order I was supposed to be able to remove), I went directly to the court. And earlier, when I tried to have the DV PO extended (it expired while the subject was on probation for violating it), the court denied any extension. The result? Same problems, less than eight hours after expiration. Ironic that the county sheriff was charged (and later pleaded to) with intimidation, but none of his officers seemed interested or capable of taking such a report from a private citizen. When I learned from one officer what I needed to do, I forwarded audio and transcript of one occurrence and my call to law enforcement (before the statute of limitations expired) to the prosecutor's office. I didn't even receive an acknowledgement. Earlier, I'd gone in to the prosecutor's office and been told that the officer's (written) report didn't match what I said occurred. Since I had the audio, I can only say that I have very little faith in Indiana government or law enforcement.

  2. One can only wonder whether Mr. Kimmel was paid for his work by Mr. Burgh ... or whether that bill fell to the citizens of Indiana, many of whom cannot afford attorneys for important matters. It really doesn't take a judge(s) to know that "pavement" can be considered a deadly weapon. It only takes a brain and some education or thought. I'm glad to see the conviction was upheld although sorry to see that the asphalt could even be considered "an issue".

  3. In response to bryanjbrown: thank you for your comment. I am familiar with Paul Ogden (and applaud his assistance to Shirley Justice) and have read of Gary Welsh's (strange) death (and have visited his blog on many occasions). I am not familiar with you (yet). I lived in Kosciusko county, where the sheriff was just removed after pleading in what seems a very "sweetheart" deal. Unfortunately, something NEEDS to change since the attorneys won't (en masse) stand up for ethics (rather making a show to please the "rules" and apparently the judges). I read that many attorneys are underemployed. Seems wisdom would be to cull the herd and get rid of the rotting apples in practice and on the bench, for everyone's sake as well as justice. I'd like to file an attorney complaint, but I have little faith in anything (other than the most flagrant and obvious) resulting in action. My own belief is that if this was medicine, there'd be maimed and injured all over and the carnage caused by "the profession" would be difficult to hide. One can dream ... meanwhile, back to figuring out to file a pro se "motion to dismiss" as well as another court required paper that Indiana is so fond of providing NO resources for (unlike many other states, who don't automatically assume that citizens involved in the court process are scumbags) so that maybe I can get the family law attorney - whose work left me with no settlement, no possessions and resulted in the death of two pets (etc ad nauseum) - to stop abusing the proceedings supplemental and small claims rules and using it as a vehicle for harassment and apparently, amusement.

  4. Been on social security sense sept 2011 2massive strokes open heart surgery and serious ovarian cancer and a blood clot in my lung all in 14 months. Got a letter in may saying that i didn't qualify and it was in form like i just applied ,called social security she said it don't make sense and you are still geting a check in june and i did ,now i get a check from my part D asking for payment for july because there will be no money for my membership, call my prescription coverage part D and confirmed no check will be there.went to social security they didn't want to answer whats going on just said i should of never been on it .no one knows where this letter came from was California im in virginia and been here sense my strokes and vcu filed for my disability i was in the hospital when they did it .It's like it was a error . My ,mothers social security was being handled in that office in California my sister was dealing with it and it had my social security number because she died last year and this letter came out of the same office and it came at the same time i got the letter for my mother benefits for death and they had the same date of being typed just one was on the mail Saturday and one on Monday. . I think it's a mistake and it should been fixed instead there just getting rid of me .i never got a formal letter saying when i was being tsken off.

  5. Employers should not have racially discriminating mind set. It has huge impact on the society what the big players do or don't do in the industry. Background check is conducted just to verify whether information provided by the prospective employee is correct or not. It doesn't have any direct combination with the rejection of the employees. If there is rejection, there should be something effective and full-proof things on the table that may keep the company or the people associated with it in jeopardy.

ADVERTISEMENT