ILNews

Opinions Sept. 17, 2012

September 17, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Fred E. Dowell v. United States of America
10-2912
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, Chief Judge Richard L. Young.
Civil. Remands with instructions for the District Court to make a determination as to whether Dowell told his attorney to file an appeal to contest whether he was a career offender. Dowell claimed his plea agreement specifically reserved his right to appeal the career offender designation, but his attorney did not file the appeal.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Todd J. Posar v. Paula M. Posar (NFP)
71A04-1201-DR-38
Domestic relation. Reverses order granting Paula Posar’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion for relief from judgment pertaining to an order establishing Todd Posar’s college expense arrearage as of that date. Remands with instructions.

Sarah L. Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1204-CR-176
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery.

Kyle Lynch v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1112-CR-1175
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class A felony child molesting.

Cory J. Pinkerton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
35A02-1202-CR-94
Criminal. Affirms five-year sentence enhancement imposed under I.C. 35-50-2-11 subsequent to Pinkerton’s conviction of Class C felony reckless homicide.

Jason Middleton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
70A01-1202-CR-69
Criminal. Affirms convictions and sentence for Class D felony possession of methamphetamine and Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia.

Geramy Ridley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1202-CR-89
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon.

Kent A. Easley v. Indiana Dept. of Correction, et al. (NFP)
49A02-1202-PL-220
Civil plenary. Affirms dismissal of lawsuit.

Rolando Miguel-Gaspar Mateo v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A04-1201-CR-17
Criminal. Affirms conviction and sentence for Class B felony aggravated battery.

Perry Odum v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1203-CR-102
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class C felony burglary and Class D felony theft.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT