ILNews

Opinions May 27, 2014

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
John Alden v. State of Indiana
30A05-1309-MI-463
Miscellaneous. Reverses denial of motion to prohibit the release of Alden’s criminal record. The trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion on the basis that the Legislature had repealed I.C. 35-38-8-3. Remands for the trial court to consider the merits of his motion.

Richard M. Tallman v. State of Indiana, Indiana Department of Natural Resources, et al. (NFP)
51A01-1305-PL-241
Civil plenary. Affirms summary judgment in favor of the Department of Natural Resources and other state actors on Tallman’s complaint alleging that DNR officer Anthony Mann negligently injured Tallman when he arrested him.

In Re: The Paternity of A.G.P.; M.O. v. R.K.P. (NFP)
39A05-1311-JP-558
Juvenile. Affirms denial to set aside a paternity decree.

Tamara J. Shidler, surviving spouse of Michael R. Shidler v. Dennis G. Lockrey, M.D., and Sigma Medical Group, LLC, d/b/a Sigma Med Express Care, and James D. Pike, D.O., et al. (NFP)
79A05-1308-CT-410
Civil tort. Affirms jury verdict in favor of defendants on Shidler’s medical malpractice complaint.

Troy A. Bratton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1310-CR-513
Criminal. Affirms the trial court decision that declined to find Bratton’s mental health to be a mitigating circumstance. Reverses Bratton’s sentence and the award of 67 days of credit time. Remands with instructions.

Chukwuemeka Chidebelu-Eze v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1308-CR-720
Criminal. Affirms battery convictions, one as a Class C felony and one as a Class D felony, and Eze’s sentence.

Marquise Lee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-869
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony attempted aggravated battery.

Dana Banks v. Evans Limestone Co. (NFP)
93A02-1307-EX-600
Agency action. Affirms denial of Dana Banks’ petition for lack of diligence, which was filed against his employer, Evans Limestone, which refused to authorize a spinal cord stimulator procedure that was recommended by three physicians.

Timothy E. Gabehart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
70A01-1401-CR-2
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to withdraw guilty plea.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of L.B. and J.B., W.B. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
73A04-1310-JT-545
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

Breondon D. Pinkston v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1309-CR-481
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license and Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass.

Jackie Robson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A04-1309-CR-486
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony child molesting.

James E. Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
12A02-1308-PC-775
Post conviction. Reverses denial of petition for post-conviction relief and remands for an evidentiary hearing.

Leonel H. Arellano v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1309-CR-373
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for child molesting as a Class A felony and two counts of child molesting as Class C felonies.

The Indiana Supreme Court and 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. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT