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. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT