ILNews

Opinions July 28, 2014

July 28, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinions were posted after IL deadline Friday:
Toni Ball v. City of Indianapolis, et al.
13-1901
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Civil. Affirms District Court’s dismissal of Ball’s wrongful arrest complaints against police and municipal defendants, preserving only a Fourth Amendment claim against a detective that since has been removed to state court. Because the allegations of the complaint did not support Ball’s claims for relief except for her Fourth Amendment claims, the district court properly dismissed and granted judgment on the pleadings of those claims.

Che B. Carter v. Keith Butts
13-2466
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker.
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for habeas corpus. Holds that Carter, serving a 90-year sentence on convictions of burglary, robbery, rape and attempted murder, was not sufficiently prejudiced. Finds that the Indiana Supreme Court did not unreasonably conclude that Carter had not met the two-prong ineffective assistance of counsel test established in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).

Leonard Dewitt v. Corizon, Inc., et al.
13-2930
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Reverses denial of motions for recruitment of counsel and grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant and remands so the court may recruit counsel so that  Dewitt can conduct further discovery in order to litigate his deliberate indifference case.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Bobby Alexander v. State of Indiana
49A04-1207-CR-351
Criminal. Reverse one of two convictions for Class B felony aggravated battery. Rules the state incorrectly asserted in the charging information and during closing arguments that Alexander’s actions of shooting at a car created a substantial risk of death. The statute clearly provides that the substantial risk of death must be created by the injury inflicted upon the victim and not by the defendant’s actions. Remands with instructions to enter judgment of conviction for battery as a Class C felony and to resentence accordingly.  

Chad Matthew McClellan v. State of Indiana
29A05-1401-CR-7
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery, holding that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude that a stun gun was a deadly weapon for purposes of the battery with a deadly weapon statute.

Ashley Bell v. State of Indiana
49A02-1312-CR-1026
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Finds Bell’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by the warrantless patdown search which led to the discovery of 10 baggies of marijuana. Rules that based on precedent, the smell of marijuana gave the police officer probable cause to conduct a patdown search.

J.P. v. G.M. and R.M.
38A02-1311-MI-960
Miscellaneous/grandparent visitation. Reverses order awarding maternal grandparents G.M. and R.M. visitation with their 3-year-old grandchild, finding that father J.P. was prejudiced by the denial of a motion for continuance after learning that grandparents were represented by counsel and he was not. Remands for a new hearing.

Uriah M. Levy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A04-1402-CR-67
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Levy’s probation.

In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.S., D.S., and N.S., Minor Children, and Their Father S.S., S.S. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1312-JT-1051
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s order terminating father’s parental right to his three minor children.

Charles E. Decker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1401-CR-19
Criminal. Affirms revocation of Decker’s probation and the trial court’s order that he serve the remaining four years of his sentence in the Indiana Department of Correction.  

Henry Lewis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1307-PC-342
Post conviction. Affirms denial of Lewis’s petition for post-conviction relief.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court did not post any opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals did not submit any Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT