ILNews

Opinions Oct. 4, 2012

October 4, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Angelina Povey v. City of Jeffersonville, Indiana
11-1896
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division, Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Affirms summary judgment for the city on Povey’s claim that her termination of employment by the city animal shelter violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and on her retaliation claim. Povey failed to meet her burden to demonstrate that she was disabled under the ADA and is not protected by its provisions.

Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court posted no opinions by IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals

In the Matter of Minor Children Alleged to be in Need of Services, T.G., A.G., and D.G., Minor Children; L.E., Mother v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
53A01-1203-JC-130
Juvenile CHINS. Affirms finding children are children in need of services.  

L.D.P. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A04-1203-JV-161
Juvenile. Affirms order L.D.P. pay restitution secondary to her adjudication as a delinquent child.

Ryan K. Powell v. State of Indiana (NFP)
19A01-1205-CR-195
Criminal. Affirms revocation of placement in community corrections and revocation of probation.

Ronald A. Bohannon v. State of Indiana (NFP)
28A01-1203-CR-115
Criminal. Affirms post-conviction court did not err in denying claim that Bohannon’s sentence violated prohibitions against double jeopardy, that the state violated I.C. 35-34-1-5(e), and in finding that Bohannon received effective assistance of counsel. Remands to correct his sentence in accordance with the post-conviction court’s determination that his original sentence for Count III was impermissibly enhanced twice.

D.B. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A05-1201-PC-18
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Brandon A. Henson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A01-1201-CR-013
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted murder.

David Allen Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A05-1201-CR-16
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony attempted murder.

Justine Miller v. Anonymous Healthcare Organization, DOE 1, DOE 2, DOE 3, DOE 4, and DOE 5 (NFP)
49A02-1201-CT-117
Civil tort. Affirms grant of summary judgment in favor of the health care organization on Miller’s claims of slander and infliction of emotional distress.

Melissa Ramos Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1203-CR-138
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class B felonies aggravated battery and neglect of a dependent.

Thomas Carr v. State of Indiana (NFP)
15A01-1202-CR-67
Criminal. Affirms sentence for two counts of Class B felony robbery while armed with a deadly weapon and two counts of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Marcel D. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1201-CR-28
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class B felony dealing in cocaine and Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT