ILNews

Opinions July 7, 2010

July 7, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

In the Matter of: A.C. v. State of Indiana

49A04-0912-JV-682
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement if committed by an adult. A.C.’s simple failure to stand, without more, amounts to passive inaction and seems analogous to the failure to present one’s arms for handcuffing, which the Indiana Supreme Court has said does not constitute forcible resistance.

Leroy Jones v. State of Indiana
27A02-1002-CR-168
Criminal. Reverses convictions of two counts of dealing in cocaine, one as a Class A felony and one as a Class B felony. The evidence was not sufficient to prove Greentree was a family housing complex on the day in question and the jury could not have so found. Because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury as to the meaning of “family housing complex,” Jones’s dealing conviction under Count 1 was enhanced via a statute that, after the acts were committed, changed the elements of the crime with which he was charged. Remands for the Class A felony to be entered as a Class B felony and to re-sentence him consistent with the opinion.

Michael A. Balasquide v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1238
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting and Class B felony incest.

Theodore N. Hannibal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
34A02-1002-CR-130
Criminal. Affirms determination Hannibal is a habitual substance offender. Remands for an amendment to the sentencing order.

Tyshekia Burris v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-CR-1133
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class D felony criminal recklessness.

Sally G. Leonard v. United Farm Family Mutual, et al. (NFP)
71A03-0909-CV-444
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for United Farm Family Mutual on Leonard’s complaint for damages and declaratory relief based on a car accident.

Marco Hernandez-Lopez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1178
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A misdemeanor conversion.

Jonathan Graves v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1284
Criminal. Affirms order revoking probation and ordering Graves serve two years of a previously suspended sentence.

Involuntary Commitment of R.C. (NFP)
49A02-0912-CV-1229
Civil. Affirms sufficiency of evidence to support order involuntarily committing R.C. to Community Hospital North Mental Health Center.

Christopher J. Geideman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1002-CR-63
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for two counts of Class A misdemeanor battery and one count of Class D felony residential entry.

Kevin D. Risner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
75A03-0907-CR-300
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator, and operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a previous conviction, and the finding Risner is a habitual substance offender.

Kurt O. Elder v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A04-1002-CR-67
Criminal. Affirms order revoking six years of probation and requiring Elder to remain on probation through the date that he was previously scheduled to be released.

T.H., II et al., Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; T.H. & S.H. v. Monroe County Department of Child Services (NFP)
53A01-0911-JV-548
Juvenile. Affirms finding children are CHINS and order that they be removed from the home.

Matthew Baugh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A02-0911-CR-1155
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and imposition of the two-year sentence that had originally been suspended.

Brian L. Riker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
14A01-0909-CR-451
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor, Class B felony attempted sexual misconduct with a minor, Class D felony sexual battery, and six counts of Class A misdemeanor contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

Harry Green, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1003-CR-178
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony intimidation, Class C misdemeanor public nudity, Class C misdemeanor operating while intoxicated, and Class C misdemeanor operation of a motor vehicle by an unlicensed driver.

Robin Ann Parks v. Michael and Kathryn Grube (NFP)
83A05-0911-CV-652
Civil. Affirms order granting custody of Parks’ children to the Grubes.

Denise L. Black v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-0912-CR-572
Criminal. Vacates eight-year executed sentence imposed following guilty plea to Class C felony reckless homicide and remands for imposition of a six-year executed sentence.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT