ILNews

Opinions July 30, 2010

July 30, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Anthony L. Vaughn
09-3789
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division, Judge Larry J. McKinney.
Criminal. Affirms 180-month sentence after pleading guilty to committing aggravated assault on a federal officer. The District Court reasonably explained why the sentence that was outside the guidelines range was appropriate.

Christopher Parish, et al. v. City of Elkhart, et al.
09-2056
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Rudy Lozano.
Civil. Reverses dismissal of his claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Under Indiana’s adoption of Heck, Parish could not have brought these claims until his conviction was disposed of in a manner favorable to him. Parish brought his claim within two years of when the claim accrued upon his exoneration, thereby making the claim timely. Affirms dismissal of false arrest and false imprisonment claims.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Robert L. Gosha v. State of Indiana
48A02-0912-CR-1210
Criminal. Reverses denial of motion to correct error. Gosha was denied the right to due process when his participation in a Drug Court Program was ended without the court first affording him notice of a hearing and the right to present evidence and cross-examine witnesses at that hearing. Remands with instructions.

William Foster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0908-CR-435
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony neglect of a dependent and Class C felony reckless homicide.

In the matter of the marriage of : L.S. v. J.H. (NFP)
41A04-0910-CV-605
Civil. Reverses trial court order that ordered father is not required to enroll C.H. in gymnastics during his extended summer parenting time in Indiana or contribute to the expenses associated with gymnastics. Remands with further instructions. Affirms decree of modification in all other respects.

Christopher W. Hovis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
92A03-0910-CR-487
Criminal. Dismisses belated appeal of convictions of and sentence for Class C felony assisting a criminal and a habitual offender enhancement.

Geronimo Montalvo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
http://media.ibj.com/Lawyer/websites/opinions/index.php?pdf=07301001lmb.pdf
12A05-0910-CR-597
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT