ILNews

Opinions March 11, 2011

March 11, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday.
Indiana Supreme Court
David K. Murphy v. State of Indiana
18S02-1103-CR-142
Criminal. Reverses trial court ruling that Murphy submit his request for six months of educational credit time for receiving his GED while awaiting sentencing to the Department of Correction. Adopts the result reached by the Indiana Court of Appeals that the trial court is the proper authority to determine whether a defendant who completes an educational degree before sentencing is entitled to educational credit time. Remands for further proceedings.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Molly C. Wilson v. Charles W. Wilson (NFP)
62A04-1004-DR-269
Domestic relation. Affirms order dissolving marriage and distributing marital property.

Claudia Scott v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1006-CR-385
Criminal. Affirms on interlocutory appeal the denial of Scott’s motion to suppress.

Kenneth Hawkins v. Debra Hawkins (NFP)
49A05-1007-DR-446
Domestic relation. The trial court abused its discretion by assigning a value of $181,800 to Kenneth’s vested pension without consideration of the present value of the benefit. Affirms in all other respects. Remands for further proceedings.

Steven A. Ratliff v. Marlene M. (Ratliff) Bontzolakes (NFP)
41A01-1005-DR-242
Domestic relation. Dismisses Ratliff’s appeal of the trial court order that he pay for college expenses incurred by his daughter.

Justin Looney v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1007-CR-395
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine but reverses his sentence and remands for re-sentencing. The trial court abused its sentencing discretion in finding Looney’s juvenile record and his lack of steady employment to be an aggravating circumstance.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT