ILNews

Opinions June 15, 2010

June 15, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeffrey D. Boggs v. State of Indiana
40A01-0907-CR-346
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and 40-year sentence for Class B felony attempted dealing in methamphetamine, two counts of Class C felony possession of a precursor while in possession of a firearm, Class D felony possession of methamphetamine, Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, and finding that Boggs is a habitual offender. The police officer had a legitimate reason for being on Boggs’ property and didn’t move anything to observe the gas tank inside of Boggs’ car. The state presented sufficient evidence to prove the identity of the substances found and to support the habitual offender finding. Remands for the trial court to correct the sentencing order.

Paul Morris v. State of Indiana (NFP)
42A04-0912-CR-724
Criminal. Affirm convictions of Class C felony burglary and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

David Eugene Ball v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-0909-CR-940
Criminal. Affirms termination of work release.

Lonnie Ray Stone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1001-CR-91
Criminal. Affirms Class C misdemeanor conviction of operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol content of at least 0.08 but less than 0.015.

Percy L. Lipscomb, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

29A05-1002-CR-54
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony forgery.

Roderick M. Walsh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
57A03-0911-CR-506
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor driving while intoxicated.

Andres Sanchez v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-0912-CR-720
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for three counts of Class A felony child molesting.

Michael Landon Deneal v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-0912-CR-569
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony burglary.

Kelly Swegman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0912-PC-738
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Brandon Puckett v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-0911-CR-1110
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

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. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

ADVERTISEMENT