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. 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