ILNews

Opinions May 12, 2011

May 12, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court
State ex rel. Gregory F. Zoeller v. Aisin USA Manufacturing, Inc.
36S01-1009-CV-469
Civil. Holds the attorney general’s attempt to recover a “tax refund” from Aisin in Jackson Superior Court may proceed. It does not arise under the tax laws because the “refund” was the result of accounting and clerical errors with in the Department of Revenue that were wholly unrelated to any interpretation or application of tax law. Justices Rucker and Dickson dissent.

Richard L. Barnes v. State of Indiana
82S05-1007-CR-343
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor battery on a law enforcement officer, Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement, and Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. There is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers, so the trial court didn’t err in failing to give Barnes’ proffered jury instruction on this right, and the evidence was sufficient to support Barnes’ convictions. Justices Rucker and Dickson dissent.


Indiana Court of Appeals
Commissioner of Labor on the Relation of Vincent and Antimo Scialdone v. An Island, LLC
49A05-1011-PL-777
Civil plenary. Affirms grant of An Island LLC’s motion to dismiss for improper venue and order the case transferred to Perry County. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it determined that Perry County was the only preferred venue for the case.

Erodney Davis v. State of Indiana
45A05-1008-CR-502
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony possession of cocaine. The trial court did err by permitting a police detective to testify as a skilled witness, but it was a harmless error. The trial court did not err by excluding evidence of a witness’s prior drug-related convictions or by giving an additional instruction to the jury that it had inadvertently omitted from the final jury instructions.

Jameson Malbrough v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1009-CR-958
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class B felony child molesting, and one count each of Class C felony child molesting, Class D felony vicarious sexual gratification, and Class D felony intimidation.

James Spann v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1009-CR-588
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor obstructing traffic.

Rodney Griffin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1010-CR-1108
Criminal. Reverses conviction of Class A misdemeanor invasion of privacy.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of R.A., et al.; A.L. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
45A03-1005-JT-271
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Lloyd Conn v. State of Indiana
24A01-1009-CR-508
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony conspiracy to commit murder. The evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction.

Robert A. Jordan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1006-PC-674
Post conviction. Affirms denial of request for additional educational credit time.

Thomas Huffine v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1010-CR-1098
Criminal. Affirms sentence following revocation of probation.

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