ILNews

Opinions March 26, 2012

March 26, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Lavern Ceaser v. State of Indiana
49A02-1106-CR-580
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of Ceaser’s motion to dismiss, holding that her prior conviction for battering the same child in the same manner similar to the underlying incident was admissible under the intent and lack of accident or mistake exceptions to Indiana Evidence Rule 404(b). Further holds evidence at trial was sufficient to rebut her claim of parental privilege.

Adrien Newson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-CR-254
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class A felony dealing in cocaine. Reverses charges for Class C felony possession of cocaine and firearm conviction and remands to the trial court to vacate those convictions, holding they are lesser offenses included in the Class A felony charge.

Lawrence Roper v. State of Indiana (NFP)
53A02-1108-CR-808
Criminal. Affirms sentence for two counts of Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax court had issued 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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT