ILNews

Opinions March 27, 2014

March 27, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
Christopher Smith v. State of Indiana
18S02-1304-CR-297
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B misdemeanor failure to report a student’s rape allegation to DCS or local law enforcement based on the statute that requires a school to report instances of child abuse. The reporting requirement is not unconstitutionally vague and there is sufficient evidence to sustain Smith’s conviction. Justices Rucker and Chief Justice Dickson dissent in a separate opinion.

Front Row Motors, LLC and Jerramy Johnson v. Scott Jones
49S02-1311-PL-758
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of Front Row Motors’ motion to set aside default judgment. The trial court lacked jurisdiction over the dealership at the time the default was entered.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Douglas J. Allison v. Heather Pepkowski
64A05-1311-PO-554
Protective order. Dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Because the court’s extension granted a temporary protection order, which is not appealable as of right, Allison was required to seek a discretionary interlocutory appeal, which he did not do.

Bobby Wine v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A05-1307-CR-382
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony dealing in a Schedule I, II or III controlled substance.

In the Matter of the Adoption of L.T.: J.M. and S.M. v. C.T. (NFP)
49A05-1310-AD-493
Adoption. Affirms order by Marion Superior Court, Probate Division, terminating the guardianship of L.T. by his maternal grandparents on grounds that Hamilton Superior Court 1 lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over L.T.’s guardianship. Remands for further proceedings, including that the parties immediately place L.T. in her father’s custody.

Ty C. Wilkerson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1307-CR-609
Criminal. Affirms conviction and eight-year sentence for Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury.

Mardel Hill v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1309-CR-377
Criminal. Affirms grant of state’s motion to join charges under two separate cause numbers for trial.

Austin M. Scholl v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-1309-CR-801
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct and Class D felony sexual battery.

The Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana decisions by IL deadline.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Residents can't vote under our current system? Okay, let's replace the system with another system where they can't vote. Yeah, that's the ticket!

  2. It's an appreciable step taken by the government to curb the child abuse that are happening in the schools. Employees in the schools those are selected without background check can not be trusted. A thorough background check on the teachers or any other other new employees must be performed to choose the best and quality people. Those who are already employed in the past should also be checked for best precaution. The future of kids can be saved through this simple process. However, the checking process should be conducted by the help of a trusted background checking agency(https://www.affordablebackgroundchecks.com/).

  3. Almost everything connects to internet these days. From your computers and Smartphones to wearable gadgets and smart refrigerators in your home, everything is linked to the Internet. Although this convenience empowers usto access our personal devices from anywhere in the world such as an IP camera, it also deprives control of our online privacy. Cyber criminals, hackers, spies and everyone else has realized that we don’t have complete control on who can access our personal data. We have to take steps to to protect it like keeping Senseless password. Dont leave privacy unprotected. Check out this article for more ways: https://www.purevpn.com/blog/data-privacy-in-the-age-of-internet-of-things/

  4. You need to look into Celadon not paying sign on bonuses. We call get the run

  5. My parents took advantage of the fact that I was homeless in 2012 and went to court and got Legal Guardianship I my 2 daughters. I am finally back on my feet and want them back, but now they want to fight me on it. I want to raise my children and have them almost all the time on the weekends. Mynparents are both almost 70 years old and they play favorites which bothers me a lot. Do I have a leg to stand on if I go to court to terminate lehal guardianship? My kids want to live with me and I want to raise them, this was supposed to be temporary, and now it is turning into a fight. Ridiculous

ADVERTISEMENT