ILNews

Opinions Sept. 19, 2012

September 19, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Michael Carpenter v. State of Indiana
85A05-1202-CR-57
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine. The police officers did not violate Carpenter’s Fourth Amendment rights when they entered the house’s curtilage pursuant to an arrest warrant and looked into the bathroom window. The officers also did not violate his rights under the Indiana Constitution.

Columbus Regional Hospital v. Clyde Amburgey, Individually and as Executor of the Estate of Moreen Amburgey
03A01-1110-CT-450
Civil tort. Affirms denial of the hospital’s request for partial summary judgment as it argued that the expiration of the statute of limitations with respect to two doctors foreclosed the suit brought by Amburgey. Genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the claim of apparent agency.

L.H. Controls, Inc. v. Custom Conveyor, Inc.
16A05-1111-PL-606
Civil plenary. Reverses award of lost profit damages to CCI in the amount of $1,144,470 for breach of contract by L.H., the award of $133,328.53 in attorney fees to CCI, award of damages of $82,184.10 for CCI’s chargebacks, and the $5,259.38 set-off for L.H. the trial court allowed against the $82,184.10. Affirms the awards of $7,077 and $928.86 in costs related to CCI’s removal of the mechanic’s lien against Honda plant’s property. Together with the damages L.H. does not challenge on appeal, this will result in a total award to CCI of $112,864.46. Remands for trial court to make necessary corrections to the judgment.

Duane Turner v. State of Indiana
18A05-1112-PC-697
Post conviction. Affirms denial of Turner’s motion for summary disposition and grant of the state’s motion for summary judgment on the constitutionality of Turner’s life sentence without parole. Affirms denial of relief based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Concludes Turner met his burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his appellate counsel was ineffective by failing to challenge his Class A felony attempted robbery resulting in serious bodily injury conviction. Remands with instructions to reduce that to a Class B felony robbery conviction.

Lavelle Malone v. Keith Butts and Bruce Lemmon
48A02-1203-MI-228
Miscellaneous. Affirms order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim filed by Butts and Lemon regarding Malone’s action for mandate. The Department of Correction complied with the requirements of I.C. 11-11-3-9 when it administratively imposed restrictions on Malone’s visits.

Kenneth Kelly v. State of Indiana (NFP)
30A01-1112-PC-612
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Bruce Kevin Pond v. State of Indiana (NFP)
90A05-1202-CR-73
Criminal. Affirms sentence for voluntary manslaughter as a Class A felony.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT