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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. 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.

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT