Opinions May 17, 2012

May 17, 2012
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Heriberto Suarez v. State of Indiana
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief. The court did not err in denying his claim that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

Timothy Hammerlund v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation. The record fails to establish that Hammerlund’s wavier of counsel was anything other than knowing, intelligent and voluntary.

City of Gary and Gary Sanitation District v. Indiana Department of Environmental Management and City of Hobart
Miscellaneous. Affirms court order affirming order of the Office of Environmental Adjudication, which upheld IDEM’s decision to issue a permit to Hobart to operate a new wastewater treatment plant. IDEM’s decision was neither arbitrary nor capricious and the decision was in accordance with the law and supported by substantial evidence.

Brian Otte v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony residential entry; three counts of Class B misdemeanor battery; Class A misdemeanor criminal mischief; Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated; Class B misdemeanor failure to stop after an accident resulting in damage to unattended vehicle; and the finding that Otte is a habitual offender. There was no error in the trial court’s Criminal Rule 4(D) continuance or its admission of testimony by a domestic violence expert. Judge Vaidik concurs in result in a separate opinion.

Duane Lee v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms Lee’s convictions of burglary as a Class B felony, rape as a Class A felony, six counts of criminal deviate conduct as Class A felonies, robbery as a Class B felony, resisting law enforcement as a Class A misdemeanor, criminal confinement as a Class B felony, intimidation as a Class C felony, and pointing a firearm as a Class D felony. The police acted improperly in swabbing Lee’s penis and the trial court erred in allowing results of that DNA test into evidence. Other evidence presented renders the error harmless.

Dewayne Jones v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony invasion of privacy. Finds Marion County is the proper venue for the case.

Dewayne Jones v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony invasion of privacy. Finds Marion County is the proper venue for the case.

Kenneth A. Lainhart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for Class B felonies dealing in methamphetamine by manufacturing and conspiracy to deal in methamphetamine by manufacturing, Class C felony possession of a handgun with obliterated identification marks, and Class D felonies maintaining a common nuisance and dumping of a controlled substance waste.

A.B. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms finding that A.B. is a delinquent child for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor battery if committed by an adult.

Alply Architectural Building Systems LLC, Alply, Inc., and John Peters v. Corrlines LLC and David J. Smith (NFP)
Civil collection. Affirms denial of Alply’s motion to dismiss the breach of contract suit.

J.H. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Juvenile. Affirms placement at the Indiana Boys’ School.

Wendell E. Mardis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Anthony Cross v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony robbery while armed with a deadly weapon.

Brian Riley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury.

Jermaine M. Lockett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentence for Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Trevon T. Marshall v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license.

Kenneth Keehn v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in a schedule I controlled substance.

David C. Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class A felony burglary and Class B felonies possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and conspiracy to commit burglary.

Mark Alderman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor cruelty to an animal.

Robin Wood v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms order that Wood pay a $200 drug interdiction fee following her guilty plea to Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.

Roderick Ramone Wiggins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of murder and sentence imposed.

Dean E. Overholser v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony possession of marijuana by cultivation.

Marvin L. Boatright v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony forgery.

John F. Fyock v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of and sentences for four counts of Class B felony dealing in a schedule I, II or III controlled substance.

Michael Lee Massing v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition to file a belated notice of appeal.

Brian Andert v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of three counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Daniel W. Beatty v. State of Indiana (NFP)
Criminal. Affirms convictions of dealing in methamphetamine, a Class A felony; conspiracy to deal methamphetamine, a Class A felony; possession of methamphetamine, a Class B felony; possession of precursors, a Class D felony; and his adjudication as a habitual substance offender.



Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.