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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT