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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT