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

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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT