ILNews

Opinions Sept. 14, 2010

September 14, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted not opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Gerald L. Wilkerson v. State of Indiana
26A01-0909-CR-457
Criminal. Affirms trial court’s denial of motion to suppress. Compliance with the Pirtle requirement (Pirtle v. State, 323 N.E.2d 634 (Ind. 1975)) was unnecessary and consent to pat-down search was valid.

Ronald Brooks v. Zores, Inc. (NFP)
93A02-1002-EX-336
Civil. Affirms full Worker’s Compensation Board’s dismissal of Brooks’ bad-faith claim.

Quintez D. Motley v. State of Indiana (NFP)
27A02-0912-CR-1222
Criminal. Affirms convictions of armed robbery, criminal confinement, carjacking, and two counts of burglary, all as Class B felonies, and theft as a Class D felony.

Anthony Fulton v. State of Indiana (NFP)
43A05-1003-CR-267
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class A misdemeanor conversion.

Mark A. Jenkins v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1005-PC-319
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of M.B., J.B., and T.B.; R.B. v. IDCS (NFP)
49A05-1002-JT-89
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.

Indiana Tax Court had posted not opinions at IL deadline.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT