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

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT