ILNews

Opinions - June 8, 2010

June 9, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Mario Arita-Campos

09-2368
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Chief Judge Philip P. Simon.
Criminal. Denies motion to dismiss Arita-Campos’ 2005 indictment of re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. Section 1326(a). He cannot establish any of the elements required under the section to collaterally attack the deportation order underlying the offense.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Aaron D. Norman, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
69A01-0906-PC-275
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief and motion to correct error.

Andre Powell v. State of Indiana (NFP)

20A04-0909-PC-539
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Eugene L. Echols v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A01-1001-CR-8
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Dave Huckaby v. Jasper County Sheriff's Office (NFP)
37A05-0909-CV-511
Civil. Affirms grant of Jasper County Sheriff’s Office’s motion to dismiss Huckaby’s complaint pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 12(B)(6).

Lance Douglas v. State of Indiana (NFP)
22A01-0907-CR-337
Criminal. Vacates Douglas’ conviction of Class A felony robbery and remands with instructions to enter it as a Class B felony. Remands for the trial court to re-sentence him to 20 years, the statutory maximum for Class B felony robbery and that it’s served concurrently with his Class A felony attempted burglary conviction but consecutively with his felony murder sentence.

Christopher Hickey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
75A04-0912-CR-704
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony burglary but reverses and remands with regard to the restitution order.  

James Cashman v. The Gables at Brighton Point, HOA (NFP)

53A01-0907-CV-369
Civil. Reverses award of $89.11 to The Gables against Cashman and remands that it be vacated. Affirms all other aspects of the judgment in favor of The Gables in their suit for past dues and Cashman’s counterclaim for violating the Fair Debt Collect Act and failing to prove the validity of the disputed finance charges and late fees.

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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT