ILNews

Opinions June 13, 2012

June 13, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Supreme Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Michael W. Baker v. State of Indiana
89S01-1109-CR-543
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary, finding the evidence suggesting that Baker opened cupboards and drawers in the kitchen is enough to support a reasonable inference that the defendant entered the church with intent to commit theft inside.

Wednesday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

United States of America v. Cristofer Tichenor
11-2433
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge Sarah Evans Barker
Criminal. Affirms 300-month sentence following guilty plea to armed robbery and discharging a firearm in connection with robbing a bank. Rejects Tichenor’s argument that the career offender sentencing guideline is unconstitutionally vague, finding that the guidelines are not susceptible to vagueness challenges and the U.S. Sentencing Commission did not exceed its authority by promulgating the “crime of violence” definition.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

In Re the Matter of: B.N. and H.C., Children in Need of Services; M.C. v. Marion Co. Dept. of Child Services and Child Advocates, Inc.
49A02-1110-JC-1025
Juvenile. Reverses determination that children are in need of services. There is insufficient evidence to support the determination that the children’s physical or mental conditions were seriously impaired or endangered as a result of the inability, refusal or neglect of the parent to supply the children with food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education or supervision.

Anthony D. Gorman v. State of Indiana
49A05-1110-CR-556
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony robbery while armed with a deadly weapon. There is sufficient evidence to support his convictions.

Dennis Jack Horner v. Marcia (Horner) Carter
34A02-1111-DR-1029
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of Horner’s request to modify the terms of a mediated settlement agreement. Alternative Dispute Resolution Rule 2.11 and Indiana Evidence Rule 408 allow the introduction of mediation communications to establish traditional contract defenses, so the trial court erred in excluding the evidence of mediation communications to establish that a mistake occurred in drafting the agreement.  But his testimony about the mediation communications falls short of establishing any mistake that might entitle him to relief, so this was a harmless error. The trial court properly determined that the agreement in this case provided for a property settlement that survived Carter’s remarriage.

Chad Stewart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1110-CR-972
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class B felony child molesting.

Auto Liquidation Center, Inc. v. McKesha Bates (NFP)
02A03-1111-SC-553
Small claim. Affirms judgment in favor of Bates on her breach of contract and criminal conversion claims. Remands for calculation of appellate attorney fees owed to Bates.

Carl D. Jackson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1111-CR-500
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony battery.

Anthony Michael Beck and Sandra Beck, natural parents and next friends of Jacob Leslie Beck, minor v. Scott Memorial Hospital and Larry Hunefeld, M.D. (NFP)
72A01-1107-CC-293
Civil collection. Affirms grant of a motion in limine filed by Scott Memorial Hospital.

 

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. 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!!!

  3. 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?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT