ILNews

Opinions Oct. 29, 2010

October 29, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following opinion was posted after IL deadline Thursday.
Indiana Tax Court
Dale J. Scopelite and James T. Sheehan v. Indiana Dept. of Local Government Finance (NFP)
49T10-0812-TA-71
Tax. Affirms the Department of Local Government Finance’s final determination approving the City of Hammond’s budget and tax levy for the 2008 tax year.

Today’s opinions
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
John Taele and Sarah Taele v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
06A01-1004-CT-259
Civil tort. Affirms summary judgment in favor of State Farm. The Taeles aren’t entitled to recover uninsured motorist benefits under their State Farm policy because they themselves were neither directly impacted nor directly physically injured by the accident that killed their daughter. Judge Crone dissents.

J.M. v. D.A.
43A03-1003-DR-183
Domestic relation. Affirms denial of father’s petition to modify child support. The trial court did not err by imputing potential earnings in father’s weekly gross income for purposes of calculating his support obligation after he became a full-time student. Reverses finding father in contempt because the trial court did not find that father has the financial ability to comply. Judge Bradford concurs in part, dissents in part.

Sean H. Chiszar v. State of Indiana
91A04-1004-CR-290
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two counts of Class D felony voyeurism, three counts of Class D felony possession of child pornography, Class A misdemeanors possession of paraphernalia, possession of marijuana, and battery. Chiszar didn’t show the voyeurism statute is unconstitutionally vague; the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion when it admitted evidence deputies obtained after Chiszar had consented to the search of his garage; and there was sufficient evidence to support the search warrant.

Douglas Denzell v. State of Indiana
49A02-1001-CR-89
Criminal. Affirms denial of Denzell’s motion to dismiss criminal charges of Class A misdeneaor resisting law enforcement and Class B misdemeanor public intoxication. Denzell does not satisfy the test in Davis and Habibzadah to show a due process violation because there remains the possibility that he will be restored to competency, even though he cannot be sentenced to an additional term if convicted.  

Y.G. v. Review Board
93A02-1004-EX-538
Civil. Affirms denial of unemployment benefits. There is no indication Y.G. explained his limitations or sought an alternative placement until such time as his disability subsided.

Rebecca Reed-Harrison v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0912-CR-740
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to dismiss criminal charge. Remands with instructions.

State of Indiana v. Lynn Wilson (NFP)
49A02-1003-PC-644
Post conviction. Reverses grant of Wilson’s petition for post-conviction relief.

Ivette Haylett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1002-CR-113
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

Charles Huntley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1004-CR-401
Criminal. Affirms convictions of murder and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license which was enhanced to a Class C felony due to a prior conviction.

Joel Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
18A05-1002-CR-52
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to five Class B felonies.

Michael Clay v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A03-1002-CR-56
Criminal. Affirms convictions of robbery resulting in serious bodily injury as a Class A felony and illegal consumption of alcohol by a minor

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.K.; S.K. v. IDCS (NFP)
76A03-1004-JT-247
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Tracy D. Price v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1004-CR-399
Criminal. Affirms decision to order the execution of Price’s suspended sentence after he violated probation terms.

Peters Broadcast Engineering v. WROI-FM (NFP)
25A03-1005-SC-260
Small claims. Affirms judgment in favor of the radio station in a dispute over alleged unpaid balance plus interest of invoices for repair and installation services performed for the station.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at 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. 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

  2. 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!

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT