ILNews

Opinions Sept. 26, 2012

September 26, 2012
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Sandra M. Bontrager, on her own behalf and on behalf of a class of those similarly situated v. Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Michael A. Gargano and Patricia Casanova
11-3710
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Chief Judge Philip P. Simon.
Civil. Affirms grant of Bontrager’s request for a preliminary injunction in her putative class-action complaint challenging Indiana’s $1,000 annual limit for dental services covered by Medicaid. The state is required to cover all medically necessary dental services, irrespective of the monetary cap.

United States of America v. Christopher Spears
11-1683
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division. Judge Rudy Lozano.
Criminal. Affirms conviction of aggravated identity theft. Spears sold his customer a fraudulent handgun permit bearing her own identifying information, which she then used in an attempt to buy a firearm, violating 18 U.S.C. Section 922(a)(6), a qualifying predicate felony for aggravated identity theft. Affirms conviction of producing a false identification document, as the fake driver’s license underlying this count is sufficiently realistic that a reasonable jury could conclude that it appears to be issued by the state of Indiana. Reverses conviction of unlawful possession of five or more false identification documents because two of the documents introduced are photocopies. Remands for resentencing.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals

Steven J. Hirst v. State of Indiana (NFP)
05A05-1204-CR-215
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following guilty plea to Class D felony possession of a controlled substance.

Randy G. Cobb v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-1203-PC-117
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Leaders Staffing LLC v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Jason P. Ballard (NFP)
93A02-1202-EX-149
Agency action. Reverses decision that Leaders Staffing did not meet its burden of proving that Ballard was discharged for just cause.

Jason Tye Myers v. State of Indiana (NFP)
79A02-1202-CR-123
Criminal. Dismisses appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Jessie M. Spears v. Review Board of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development and Meijer Stores Limited Partnership (NFP)
93A02-1106-EX-519
Agency action. Affirms denial of claim for unemployment benefits.

Daniel Nolan v. State of Indiana (NFP)
17A03-1205-CR-215
Criminal. Affirms sentence imposed following guilty plea to Class C felony incest.

Kevin A. Nasser v. State of Indiana (NFP)
84A05-1202-CR-82
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class D felony battery by body waste, Class A misdemeanor battery, and Class B misdemeanors battery, disorderly conduct and public intoxication.

Brandon King v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1202-CR-90
Criminal. Affirms denial of King’s request at his sentencing hearing to withdraw his guilty pleas to five felonies under three cause numbers.

Joshua Banks v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1203-CR-120
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A misdemeanor patronizing a prostitute.

Gregory D. Webster v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A05-1203-CR-109
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana and Class B felony possession of cocaine.

Baron D. McClung v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-1202-CR-80
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class D felony domestic battery.
 

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. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  2. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  3. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  4. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  5. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

ADVERTISEMENT