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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT