Opinions June 16, 2010

June 16, 2010
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

M.T. v. State of Indiana
Juvenile. Reverses modification of probation and commitment to the Department of Correction. The state presented no evidence of the probation violations it alleged and the state violated M.T.’s due process rights.

Jason G. Ertel v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated. The trial court didn’t abuse its discretion by admitting evidence obtained after Ertel’s car was stopped because the police officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop.

John Dyer, David White, and Maurice Dillender v. James H. Hall and Nu-Plaza Yacht Club

Civil. Reverses summary judgment in favor of Hall on the complaint his boat docks interfere with Dyer, White, and Dillender’s use of the river. There is an issue of fact as to whether or to what extent the landowners have access to the river, and whether the deadmen installed on the landowners’ property are a nuisance or a trespass.

Paternity of R.M.; N.C. v. K.M. (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms order denying father N.C.’s motion for change of venue from judge pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 76(B).

David Mazhandu v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms conviction of resisting law enforcement as a Class A misdemeanor.

James D. Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony child molesting. Reverses sentence and remands for it to be revised to 40 years in prison.

Rocky D. Beavers Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony child molesting and Class B felony incest.

Herman F. Filice v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to “remove sexually violent predator status.”

J.M. Alleged to be C.H.I.N.S.; H.M. and D.M. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms finding that J.M. is a child in need of services.

Michael R. Pollard, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Rickey D. Gosha v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation and order that Gosha serve the remainder of his sentence.

Lorenzo Borders v. City of Elkhart, Ind., et al. (NFP)
Civil. Affirms summary judgment and motions to dismiss Borders’ complaint for false arrest and false imprisonment in favor of the City of Elkhart, et al.

George Cox, et al. v. Honorable Roger D. Davis (NFP)
Civil. Affirms dismissal of complaint filed by Cox and others against Harrison Superior Judge Davis.

Jason Wells v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony child molesting.

James A. Barber v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of child molestation as Class A felonies, and two counts of sexual misconduct with a minor as Class B felonies.

Larry Andrew Anderson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felony possession of a controlled substance and Class D felony possession of a legend drug.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.



Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Especially I would like to see all the republican voting patriotic good ole boys to stop and understand that the wars they have been volunteering for all along (especially the past decade at least) have not been for God & Jesus etc no far from it unless you think George Washington's face on the US dollar is god (and we know many do). When I saw the movie about Chris Kyle, I thought wow how many Hoosiers are just like this guy, out there taking orders to do the nasty on the designated bad guys, sometimes bleeding and dying, sometimes just serving and coming home to defend a system that really just views them as reliable cannon fodder. Maybe if the Christians of the red states would stop volunteering for the imperial legions and begin collecting welfare instead of working their butts off, there would be a change in attitude from the haughty professorial overlords that tell us when democracy is allowed and when it isn't. To come home from guarding the borders of the sandbox just to hear if they want the government to protect this country's borders then they are racists and bigots. Well maybe the professorial overlords should gird their own loins for war and fight their own battles in the sandbox. We can see what kind of system this really is from lawsuits like this and we can understand who it really serves. NOT US.... I mean what are all you Hoosiers waving the flag for, the right of the president to start wars of aggression to benefit the Saudis, the right of gay marriage, the right for illegal immigrants to invade our country, and the right of the ACLU to sue over displays of Baby Jesus? The right of the 1 percenters to get richer, the right of zombie banks to use taxpayer money to stay out of bankruptcy? The right of Congress to start a pissing match that could end in WWIII in Ukraine? None of that crud benefits us. We should be like the Amish. You don't have to go far from this farcical lawsuit to find the wise ones, they're in the buggies in the streets not far away....

  2. Moreover, we all know that the well heeled ACLU has a litigation strategy of outspending their adversaries. And, with the help of the legal system well trained in secularism, on top of the genuinely and admittedly secular 1st amendment, they have the strategic high ground. Maybe Christians should begin like the Amish to withdraw their services from the state and the public and become themselves a "people who shall dwell alone" and foster their own kind and let the other individuals and money interests fight it out endlessly in court. I mean, if "the people" don't see how little the state serves their interests, putting Mammon first at nearly every turn, then maybe it is time they wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe all the displays of religiosity by American poohbahs on down the decades have been a mask of piety that concealed their own materialistic inclinations. I know a lot of patriotic Christians don't like that notion but I entertain it more and more all the time.

  3. If I were a judge (and I am not just a humble citizen) I would be inclined to make a finding that there was no real controversy and dismiss them. Do we allow a lawsuit every time someone's feelings are hurt now? It's preposterous. The 1st amendment has become a sword in the hands of those who actually want to suppress religious liberty according to their own backers' conception of how it will serve their own private interests. The state has a duty of impartiality to all citizens to spend its judicial resources wisely and flush these idiotic suits over Nativity Scenes down the toilet where they belong... however as Christians we should welcome them as they are the very sort of persecution that separates the sheep from the wolves.

  4. What about the single mothers trying to protect their children from mentally abusive grandparents who hide who they truly are behind mounds and years of medication and have mentally abused their own children to the point of one being in jail and the other was on drugs. What about trying to keep those children from being subjected to the same abuse they were as a child? I can understand in the instance about the parent losing their right and the grandparent having raised the child previously! But not all circumstances grant this being OKAY! some of us parents are trying to protect our children and yes it is our God given right to make those decisions for our children as adults!! This is not just black and white and I will fight every ounce of this to get denied

  5. Mr Smith the theory of Christian persecution in Indiana has been run by the Indiana Supreme Court and soundly rejected there is no such thing according to those who rule over us. it is a thought crime to think otherwise.