ILNews

Opinions July 7, 2011

July 7, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
N.K. v. Review Board
93A02-1012-EX-1431
Civil. Reverses determination by the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development that a worker fired for taking leftovers was not entitled to unemployment benefits.

Thomas A. Peel v. State of Indiana
76A05-1012-CR-809
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea, holding that Peel did not tender a proper written motion to the court.

Christopher Hovis v. State of Indiana

02A03-1101-CR-47
Criminal. Dismisses appeal of trial court’s denial of belated motion to correct error pursuant to Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 2(2). Holds that at the time of defendant’s sentencing, existing caselaw supported a direct appeal of any perceived sentencing errors after a plea of guilty and that Hovis is therefore not entitled to a second direct appeal.

Vernon D. Hall v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A04-1012-CR-797
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony burglary.

Tyrone A. Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1011-CR-694
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony criminal recklessness with a deadly weapon, Class A misdemeanor battery, and Class C felony battery.

Donald L. Helton v. State of Indiana (NFP)

34A04-1012-CR-805
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony possession of methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of a family housing complex and Class D felony possession of marijuana.

Rick W. Bagby, II v. Carla M. Bagby (NFP)

82A01-1011-DR-609
Divorce resolution. Affirms trial court’s grant of mother’s petition to modify custody.

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