ILNews

Opinions May 6, 2011

May 6, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday:
Indiana Supreme Court
Joshua Konopasek v. State of Indiana
25S03-1012-CR-669
Criminal. Reaffirms the Fletcher limitation on the judicial-temperance presumption. Summarily affirms the Indiana Court of Appeals decision finding sufficient evidence to support Konopasek’s conviction and to disprove his self-defense claim. Concludes the trial court properly admitted the evidence in question and affirms his conviction of and sentence for Class C felony battery causing serious bodily injury.  

Today’s opinions
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Jermel C. Thomas
10-3566
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division,
Judge Robert L. Miller, Jr.
Criminal. Dismisses appeal, stating the District Court did not err in enforcing a plea agreement wherein Jermel Thomas had waived his right to appeal his sentence and conviction.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
John Witt, Hydrotech Corp. and Mark Shere v. Jay Petroleum, Inc. and Jack R. James
38A02-0912-CV-1290
Civil. Reverses trial court’s award of attorney fees to Jay Petroleum and Jack James, ruling the trial court erred when it determined the appellants were in contempt of court.  

Gayle D. Edelen v. State of Indiana
26A01-1007-CR-362
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felonies of perjury and official misconduct against Gayle D. Edelen, a caseworker for the Indiana Department of Child Services. States that the transcript of the closed juvenile procedure hearing in which Edelen perjured herself was admissible in Edelen’s perjury trial.

R.L. Turner Corporation v. Town of Brownsburg
32A01-1008-PL-373
Civil plenary. Affirms trial court’s order awarding attorney fees to the Town of Brownsburg, ruling that R.L. Turner Corporation’s lawsuit was frivolous, unreasonable, and groundless.

Dwayne Eversley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1008-CR-497
Criminal. Affirms convictions of invasion of privacy, as both a Class D felony and a Class A misdemeanor, and resisting law enforcement, as both a Class D felony and a Class A misdemeanor.

A.M. v. Review Board (NFP)
93A02-1008-EX-887
Civil. Affirms Indiana Department of Workforce Development Review Board’s denial of unemployment compensation benefits.

Steven Gray v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A05-1010-CR-690
Criminal. Affirms 50-year sentence for Class A felony child molesting. Reverses convictions of Class B felonies rape and incest on double jeopardy grounds, and remands with instructions to vacate.

Tiffany L. Otten v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1009-CR-538
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony neglect of a dependant.

Willie J. Herman v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1010-CR-560
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony battery.

Jerry Kohlhouse v. Black's Excavation (NFP)
42A01-1010-SC-594
Small claim. Affirms trial court’s judgment for Black’s Excavation and its dismissal of Jerry Kohlhouse’s counter-claim.

A.F. & R.B. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)
20A03-1010-JC-521
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms trial court’s adjudication of children as children in need of services.

Ronald Cox v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1009-CR-536
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class C felony child molesting and one count Class D felony child solicitation.

Jermarcus L. Grandberry v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1010-CR-643
Criminal. Affirms conviction of and sentence for Class B felony burglary.

Jamie L. Vida v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1012-PL-664
Civil plenary. Reverses denial of verified petition for removal from the Indiana Sex Offender Registry. Remands with instructions to grant petition.

Tyler Sturdivant v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1008-CR-934
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony battery and Class A misdemeanor battery.

Marlon D. Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1010-CR-597
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s finding that Taylor violated his community corrections placement and probation.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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.

  2. 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?

  3. 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

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT