ILNews

Opinions June 5, 2012

June 5, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had issued no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Tax Court and Indiana Supreme Court had issued no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Kevin C. O'Connell v. State of Indiana
18A02-1109-CR-889
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s decision to refuse O’Connell’s tendered jury instructions that the word “voluntary” be included with each of his charges. Holds that other instructions covered the substance of the tendered instructions.

James Ripps v. State of Indiana
15A01-1109-CR-436
Criminal. Reverses trial court’s revocation of Ripps’ probation, holding that several factors – including Ripps’ age, health and his efforts to comply with terms of his probation – indicate the court abused its discretion in issuing its order.

Bennie Chamberlain v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1108-CR-770
Criminal. Reverses sentences for Class C felony stalking, Class C felony criminal confinement and Class D felony residential entry, holding the crimes were part of a single episode of criminal conduct and the consecutive sentences exceeded the maximum allowable time under Indiana Code. Remands for resentencing, including attachment of habitual offender enhancement.  

Milan D. Zavodny, Trustee of the Milan D. Zavodny Trust v. Evelyn Ann Pavilionis Trust U/W/A, Dated 18 March 1997 (NFP)
75A03-1110-PL-458
Civil plenary. Holds trial court erred in awarding $43,000 in damages to Pavilionis and therefore reverses and remands for a determination of actual damages, if any, and a determination of whether prejudgment interest should be awarded. Affirms trial court’s denial of Zavodny’s request for a continuance.

Performance Matters Associates and Conseco Marketing, LLC v. Patrick A. Fortune (NFP)
29A05-1107-PL-361
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s entry of judgment in favor of Fortune.

In the Matter of the Paternity of N.M.E., Minor Child; J.E.E., Father v. J.B., Mother (NFP)
71A03-1112-JP-549
Juvenile. Reverses juvenile court’s order that father’s parenting time with daughter is to be supervised, holding the court made no finding of physical endangerment or emotional impairment. Remands for court to enter findings or remove restrictions on parenting time.

Mark Shepard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1108-CR-415
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class C felony conspiracy to commit robbery and felony murder.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT