ILNews

Opinions Nov. 6, 2013

November 6, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Court of Appeals
Kimberly Kubina v. State of Indiana
45A03-1303-CR-100
Criminal. Affirms 35-year sentence following guilty plea to Class A felony neglect of a dependent. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding Kubina was in a position of trust with her stepson.

Christopher Cross v. State of Indiana
73A01-1303-CR-134
Criminal. Cross’s sentence for carrying a handgun without a license and the sentence enhancement for using said handgun during the commission of the act of dealing in cocaine did not violate the prohibitions against double jeopardy. Vacates conviction of Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license because it is a lesser-included offense of the Class C felony conviction carrying a handgun without a license. Remands with instructions to vacate the misdemeanor conviction.

Keianna Rae Harrison v. Cynthia L. Wells (NFP)
49A02-1303-CC-265
Civil collection. Dismisses appeal of the denial of Harrison’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion for relief from a default judgment entered in favor of Wells.

Joshua Doan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1302-CR-90
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony burglary but reverses determination Doan is a habitual offender as he did not intelligently waive his jury-trial rights for the habitual-offender charge. Remands for a jury trial or bench trial on this count.

Curtis McGrone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1304-CR-347
Criminal. Affirms 40-year aggregate sentence for Class B felony robbery and two counts of Class B felony criminal confinement.

Cleve Stone v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1303-CR-102
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A felony burglary and Class C felony robbery.

Dexter Stacy, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
76A04-1303-CR-113
Criminal. Affirms 75-year aggregate sentence for two counts of Class A felony child molesting.

John Garbacz v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1303-CR-87
Criminal. Reverses denial of motion to discharge and remands with instructions for the court to grant Garbacz’s motion.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals posted no Indiana opinions by IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT