ILNews

Opinions, May 23, 2011

May 23, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion  posted after IL deadline May 20
USA v. Sidney O. Sellers
09-2516
Criminal. Vacates sentences for possession with intent to sell crack cocaine and possession of a firearm used in drug trafficking, and orders new trial for Sidney O. Sellers, stating the court failed to consider Sellers’s reasons for requesting a motion for a continuance. Remands for a new trial, including all pre-trial proceedings.

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

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jimmie E. Jones, Jr. v. State of Indiana
29A02-1008-CR-935
Criminal. Affirms conviction for felony murder, stating that the trial court did not err by refusing Jimmie Jones’s tendered instructions on reckless homicide and involuntary manslaughter, as evidence suggests Jones knowingly and willingly killed the victim.

Stephen Robertson, et al. v. B.O., et al.
49A04-1009-CT-528
Civil tort. Reverses partial summary judgment with respect to the compensable damages in favor of appellee-plaintiff B.O., a minor, stating the trial court erred in excluding the Indiana Compensation Fund’s evidence regarding the extent of B.O.’s damages.

Willie McCain, Jr. v. State of Indiana
27A02-1009-CR-985
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s judgment of conviction for Class B felony dealing in cocaine, stating that while the court erred in prohibiting as unsubstantiated any discussion of the confidential informant’s criminal background, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

James Andrew Foxworthy v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A05-1009-CR-583
Criminal. Reverses conviction for Class A misdemeanor domestic battery, stating the trial court abused its discretion in admitting a deputy’s testimony over the defendant’s hearsay objection.

Jack M. Estes, II v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A04-1010-CR-693
Criminal. Reverses consecutive sentences for revocation of probation in Hendricks and Boone counties, and remands for imposition of concurrent sentences.

Ronald Hollin v. State of Indiana (NFP)
36A01-1008-CR-378
Criminal. Affirms convictions for Class A felony child molesting and other related counts.

Joseph Cree v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A02-1009-PC-1008
Post-conviction relief petition. Affirms order of post-conviction court’s summary denial of petition.

Johnny Baptiste v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1010-CR-616
Criminal. Reverses convictions for Class D felony auto theft and Class A misdemeanor battery; upholds conviction for Class A felony robbery, stating the robbery and auto theft convictions violate the double-jeopardy single-larceny rule and convictions for robbery violate actual-evidence test.

Donald Mallard v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1006-PC-362
Post-conviction relief petition. Affirms denial of post-conviction relief petition.

Russel F. Cowherd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1008-CR-567
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class C felony possession of cocaine.

Quan Ning Huang v. Tanas B. Donev (NFP)
02A03-1012-MF-661
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirm’s grant of summary judgment and corresponding entry of decree of foreclosure in favor of Tanas B. Doney.

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