ILNews

Opinions Oct. 31, 2012

October 31, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following Indiana Tax Court opinion was posted after IL deadline Tuesday:
Wendt, LLP v. Indiana Department of State Revenue
02T10-0701-TA-2
Tax. Affirms the department’s determination that the items predominately used by Wendt for estimate preparations, machinery reassembly and lawn care are not entitled to the public transportation exemption. Reverses all of the department’s remaining determinations because those items are necessary and integral to Wendt’s public transportation process. Remands and orders the department to make the necessary determinations in accordance with the opinion.

Wednesday’s opinions
Indiana Court of Appeals
Robertson Fowler v. State of Indiana
49A05-1202-PC-68
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief. Fowler received a benefit at the time he entered into his plea bargain, so he may not now challenge the sentence as illegal.

Larry Michael Caraway v. State of Indiana
47A04-1205-CR-265
Criminal. Affirms sentence for murder following open guilty plea. His sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.

Kevin M. Clark v. State of Indiana
20A05-1202-CR-62
Criminal. Affirms admission of evidence found in his bag and trunk of his car, and the admission of police testimony regarding the conversion of pseudoephedrine to methamphetamine. The police officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the men and because Clark admitted his bag contained marijuana, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting items found in his bag. The police trooper’s testimony regarding conversion was rationally based on her perceptions and was helpful to the determination of facts at issue in the case.

Gaude L. Hughes v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1203-CR-132
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony voluntary manslaughter.

Billy Fox, Jr. v. Rogers Building Ventures, et al. (NFP)
53A05-1203-CP-160
Civil plenary. Affirms denial of objection to personal jurisdiction and the motion to set aside judgment.

Joshua D. Hughes v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-1112-PC-591
Post conviction. Affirms denial of Ind. Trial Rule 72(E) request for an extension of time within which to appeal the denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

C.L. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-1203-JV-232
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as delinquent for what would be Class C felony battery if committed by an adult.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of D.C.: L.B. (father) v. The Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
82A01-1203-JT-114
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.  

Troy and Mary Hill v. Beta Steel Corporation (NFP)
93A02-1203-EX-215
Agency appeal. Affirms denial of death benefits.

In the Matter of the Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of A.A.M., and B.J. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
02A03-1201-JT-42
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Lukuman Aderbigbe v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1203-PC-219
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Kenneth W. Gilland v. State of Indiana (NFP)
32A01-1203-CR-143
Criminal. Reverses order that Gilland pay more than $20,000 in restitution. Because Gilland agreed to pay nearly $10,000 in restitution in a plea agreement, he may not challenge the portion that relates to the loss in value of a motorcycle on appeal. Remands with instructions to reduce the restitution order to $9,949.62.

James R. Ferguson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1110-CR-968
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony sexual misconduct with a minor.

Gregory J. Schnelker v. Indiana Department of Insurance Patient's Compensation Authority (NFP)
49A02-1201-CT-33
Civil tort. Affirms order which declined to award Schnelker damages for loss of wages and capacity and for increased risk of future harm.

Timothy A. Stevens v. State of Indiana (NFP)
64A03-1111-PC-525
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Steven Hook, Sr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1204-CR-203
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery with a deadly weapon.

Mark Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1201-CR-4
Criminal. Grants rehearing and affirms original opinion in all respects, which affirmed the order Williams serve his entire sentence that was suspended at the time of initial sentencing.

Frederic Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1110-PC-621
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of J.D.: W.H. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
79A02-1203-JT-201
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT