ILNews

Opinions June 20, 2012

June 20, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinions were posted after IL deadline Tuesday:

Indiana Supreme Court

Tina Whiting v. State of Indiana
38S05-1206-CR-345
Criminal. Affirms a murder conviction and sentence, holding the trial court did not err when it empanelled a juror after denying a joint challenge for cause. The court ruled that because the defendant had not exhausted peremptory challenges and didn’t move to strike the juror, no error was preserved for review.

Indiana Tax Court
Harsukh and Parul Bosamia v. Marion County Assessor
49T10-1108-TA-53
Tax. Dismisses the Bosamias’ appeal of the Indiana Board of Tax Review’s final determination upholding the commercial real property assessments for the 2007 and 2008 tax years. The Bosamias did not timely file the certified administrative record as required by Tax Court Rule 3(E).

Wednesday’s opinions:
Indiana Supreme Court

In the Matter of: Douglas W. Patterson
82S00-1111-DI-662
Discipline. Disbars Patterson for committing three counts of Class D felony theft of client funds and for engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

John Berry v. State of Indiana
49S04-1110-CR-611
Criminal. Affirms Class A felony attempted murder conviction and the trial court’s rejection of Berry’s insanity defense because there was credible expert testimony that his behavior was caused by his voluntary abuse of alcohol.

Rondell Walker v. State of Indiana
34S02-1206-CR-346
Criminal. Grants transfer and orders Walker’s sentence revised from 20 years to 12 years, citing Abbot v. State. Walker pleaded guilty to Class B felony possession of cocaine and originally was referred to drug court, but his participation in the program was terminated and the trial court sentenced him to the maximum term of 20 years. Justice Massa voted to deny transfer.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Town of Zionsville, Indiana and Zionsville Plan Commission v. Hamilton County Airport Authority
49A05-1107-PL-374
Civil plenary. Reverses judgment in favor of the airport authority and orders judgment entered for the town of Zionsville. Rejects the airport authority’s argument that it’s not obligated to seek zoning approval from Zionsville or any other entity before carrying out its duties regarding an airport it owns in Boone County.

Jason Michael Palilonis v. State of Indiana
42A05-1104-CR-197
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony rape. Finds trial court’s admittance of evidence of alleged rape victim B.S.’s death because this was the fairest resolution for both parties as to why she was not testifying at trial. The statements B.S. made to the nurse during her sexual-assault examination are admissible under Evidence Rule 803(4) and the reasoning in Perry v. State for the description of the events of the rape. The nurse’s statements that were impermissible vouching testimony should not have been admitted at trial but it did not rise to the level of fundamental error.

Danny L. Weaver v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A01-1111-CR-582
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony child molesting.

Mickey S. Owen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
87A01-1111-CR-562
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to two counts of Class D felony theft.

Walter James Blake v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1112-PC-1134
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Ronnie D. Inabnitt v. State of Indiana (NFP)
33A01-1110-CR-517
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class A felony child molesting but revises sentence from 70 years to 35 years.

Bakari Edwards v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1111-CR-1006
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony obstruction of justice and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana. Reverses order Edwards serve a term of imprisonment for a Class A infraction and remands for further proceedings.

Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT