ILNews

Opinions July 7, 2014

July 7, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Z.A. v. State of Indiana
49A02-1311-JV-973
Juvenile. Reverses adjudication that Z.A. committed what would be Class D felony theft if committed by an adult. The state did not prove that Z.A. exerted unauthorized control over the television he and his mother purchased together when he took it from his mother’s home over her objection.

Freddie Patterson v. State of Indiana
49A02-1311-CR-944
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. Sufficient evidence supports the conviction and the trial court did not err in redacting Patterson’s proposed final instruction nor did it commit fundamental error by adding a sentence to another instruction he tendered.

James Toy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1311-CR-446
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor intimidation.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: J.S. (minor child); N.W. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1309-JT-778
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Anthony Neumeister v. City of Greenfield, Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1309-PL-387
Civil plenary. Affirms termination of Neumeister’s employment.

Maurice V. Brown v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1311-CR-554
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felony stalking.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Is it possible to amend an order for child support due to false paternity?

  2. He did not have an "unlicensed handgun" in his pocket. Firearms are not licensed in Indiana. He apparently possessed a handgun without a license to carry, but it's not the handgun that is licensed (or registered).

  3. Once again, Indiana's legislature proves how friendly it is to monopolies. This latest bill by Hershman demonstrates the lengths Indiana's representatives are willing to go to put big business's (especially utilities') interests above those of everyday working people. Maassal argues that if the technology (solar) is so good, it will be able to compete on its own. Too bad he doesn't feel the same way about the industries he represents. Instead, he wants to cut the small credit consumers get for using solar in order to "add a 'level of certainty'" to his industry. I haven't heard of or seen such a blatant money-grab by an industry since the days when our federal, state, and local governments were run by the railroad. Senator Hershman's constituents should remember this bill the next time he runs for office, and they should penalize him accordingly.

  4. From his recent appearance on WRTV to this story here, Frank is everywhere. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, although he should stop using Eric Schnauffer for his 7th Circuit briefs. They're not THAT hard.

  5. They learn our language prior to coming here. My grandparents who came over on the boat, had to learn English and become familiarize with Americas customs and culture. They are in our land now, speak ENGLISH!!

ADVERTISEMENT