ILNews

Opinions May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Hamilton County Assessor v. SPD Realty, LLC
49T10-1104-TA-28
Tax. Affirms the Board of Tax Review’s final determination that SPD Realty’s real and personal property qualified for a charitable purposes exemption for the 2009 tax year. The board’s final determination is not contrary to law and unsupported by substantial evidence because New Life occupied and used the property for a charitable purpose; SPD owned the property for a charitable purpose; and the property was predominately used for charitable purposes.

Wednesday’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Joshua Bunn v. Khoury Enterprises Inc.
13-2292
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Judge William T. Lawrence.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for Bunn’s former employer, a Dairy Queen franchise, on his claims that his employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bunn’s failure-to-accommodate claim falls short because his employer did reasonably accommodate his disability. His disparate treatment claim fails because he has not introduced sufficient evidence to create a triable issue of material fact and because the undisputed facts show that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Craig Alvey v. State of Indiana
20A04-1310-MI-533
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of Alvey’s petition to expunge the records of his conviction. He did not meet all the requirements of the expungement statute because he admitted twice to violating his probation before successfully completing his sentence.

Melisa R. Digbie v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development and Eaglecare LLC
93A02-1312-EX-1054
Agency action. Reverses decision of the Review Board of the Department of Workforce Development in favor of Eaglecare LLC on Digbie’s claim for unemployment benefits and its determination that Digbie received notice of the Aug. 6 hearing. The DWD presented no evidence that it mailed notice of the hearing to Digbie, so it was not entitled to the rebuttable presumption that she received notice. Remands for a new evidentiary hearing.

Tyrece Robertson v. State of Indiana
49A05-1310-CR-487
Criminal. Reverses convictions of Class D felony attempted residential entry and Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief. The trial court erred when it overruled Robertson’s Baston challenge contesting the state’s use of a peremptory challenge to strike a juror.

A.H. v. State of Indiana
49A05-1309-JV-450
Juvenile. Affirms juvenile court’s restitution order requiring A.H. to provide restitution to the probation department for the electronic monitoring bracelet she cut off and left at a park. The admission agreement left disposition open to the juvenile court and the court did not fail to inquire into her ability to pay.

Jeremy L. Honaker v. State of Indiana (NFP)
39A01-1306-PC-291
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Napoleon Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-1308-CR-434
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to suppress the results of a traffic stop.

Jory D. Peters v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1305-CR-177
Criminal. Affirms murder conviction.

Idowa Hood v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1309-CR-828
Criminal. Reverses sentence and orders trial court to resentence Hood and calculate his pretrial credit time in accordance with I.C. 35-38-3-2(b)(4).

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: S.S. (Minor Child), and S.S. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
49A02-1309-JT-784
Juvenile. Affirms order denying mother’s motion for relief under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) and involuntarily terminating her parental rights.

Rachel M. Swaney and Eric Swaney v. Chrysler Group LLC and Grieger's Motor Sales, Inc. (NFP)
64A03-1401-CT-25
Civil tort. Reverses dismissal of the Swaneys’ complaint for failure to prosecute and remands for further proceedings.

Gary Maxwell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1308-CR-427
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated in a manner that endangers a person.  

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: A.C. (Minor Child) and E.C. (Mother) and R.C. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
48A02-1310-JT-875
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Johnnie Winford v. State of Indiana (NFP)

22A01-1307-CR-303
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony nonsupport of a dependent child.

Mercedes Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1311-CR-962
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor theft.

Jeffrey Duncan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-456
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a BAC equivalent to 0.15 and determination as a habitual substance offender.

Kevin A. Deubner v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1309-CR-439
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in community corrections program.

Deandrew Russell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A04-1308-CR-389
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class C felony criminal confinement.

Vincent W. Hren v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1310-CR-436
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class D felonies operating a vehicle as a habitual traffic violator and operating a vehicle while intoxicated.

Michael Widup v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-861
Criminal. Affirms conviction for Class A felony child molesting and three convictions of Class C felony child molesting but vacates one conviction of Class C felony child molesting as it violates double jeopardy. Vacates sentence imposed on that count.

William Crockett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1307-PC-374
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Jesse Clements v. Davina Curry (NFP)
49A02-1308-CT-713
Civil tort. Affirms dismissal of Clements’ counterclaim, reverses grant of summary judgment to Curry and remands for a hearing.

Rashawn Speed v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1308-CR-696
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony child molesting, Class C felony child molesting and Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Steve D. Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A01-1310-CR-438
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class B felony dealing in narcotics.

Justin M. Alexander v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1310-CR-403, 02A03-1310-CR-404, 02A03-1310-CR-405
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentences in three separate, but related, criminal appeals. Remands for clarification of the sentencing orders.

Jason Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1310-CR-891
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony residential entry, Class A misdemeanor interference with reporting a crime and Class A misdemeanor conversion.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline Wednesday.
 

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. I grew up on a farm and live in the county and it's interesting that the big industrial farmers like Jeff Shoaf don't live next to their industrial operations...

  2. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  3. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  4. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  5. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

ADVERTISEMENT