ILNews

Opinions Oct. 5, 2011

October 5, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
P.J. v. State of Indiana

49A05-1102-JV-121
Juvenile. Affirms restitution order following adjudication, after a guilty plea, as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class B felony burglary if committed by an adult. P.J. waived his right to have the juvenile court inquire into his ability to pay, as he has acknowledged such ability in his plea agreement.

State of Indiana v. Gordon V. Vankirk
29A02-1012-CR-1418
Criminal. Affirms trial court finding Vankirk not guilty of operating a motor vehicle while privileges are forfeited for life as a Class C felony. Entering a judgment of conviction for a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Indiana Code 35-38-1-1.5 for an offense under I.C. 9-30-10-16 removes the lifetime forfeiture of a defendant’s driving privileges.

David Robinson v. State of Indiana
49A02-1101-CR-13
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation. The trial court erred in admitting an affidavit prepared by a detective based on information another police officer told him regarding a domestic dispute between Robinson and his girlfriend. The state presented and the trial court found there were additional factors warranting revocation of Robinson’s probation.

Howard Steele v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1102-CR-157
Criminal. Reverses post-conviction court’s summary denial of petition for education credit time for a high school diploma earned from an unaccredited school. Remands for a hearing.

Jyshawn D. Moore v. State of Indiana (NFP)

71A03-1102-CR-115
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to three counts of Class B felony burglary.

Myia Relphorde v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1103-CR-91
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony conspiracy to commit robbery.

Raymond Cox, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
73A04-1101-CR-116
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to possession of marijuana as a Class D felony.

Christopher West v. Eileen Mary Flaherty (NFP)
49A04-1012-CC-747
Civil collection. Affirms denial of West’s motion to declare a California judgment void and to vacate an agreed judgment.

In Re: The Unsupervised Administration of the Estate of Ozella T. Schlosser, deceased (NFP)
30A01-1106-EU-226
Estate, unsupervised. Dismisses William Schlosser’s appeal of the denial of his petition to reopen the estate of his mother.

Daniel J. Hollen v. State of Indiana (NFP)
42A01-1105-MI-206
Miscellaneous. Affirms denial of motion to correct error.

Frederick Hampton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1103-CR-258
Criminal. Affirms imposition of a $100 public defender fee.

Delbert R. Majors v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1012-CR-660
Criminal. Affirms sentence for Class B felony causing death when operating a motor vehicle with a schedule II controlled substance in the blood.

In Re: The Marriage of Dorothy Borgan v. Terry R. Borgan, Sr. (NFP)
49A04-1012-DR-785
Domestic relation. Reverses order as it pertains to modification of the wife’s portion of the husband’s monthly retirement payment and instructs the trial court, if necessary, to have a new qualified domestic relations order entered which reflects this decision. Affirms denial of wife’s contempt and attorney fees petition.

Term. of Parent-Child of T.S.; A.R. v. Indiana Dept. of Child Services (NFP)
71A03-1104-JT-210
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT