ILNews

Opinions Sept. 18, 2013

September 18, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court

The following opinion was issued after IL deadline Tuesday.


Kevin M. Clark v. State of Indiana
20S05-1301-CR-10
Criminal. Reverses conviction and 45-year sentence for Class A felony attempted dealing in methamphetamine, holding that police violated the Fourth Amendment protections of Kevin Clark when a late-night call regarding someone allegedly living improperly at a 24-hour self-storage unit instead became a “fishing expedition” for narcotics based on an officer’s hunch. Officers saw nothing illegal or appearing to constitute narcotics use, and evidence gathered from resulting search must be suppressed as fruit of the poison tree, a 4-1 majority ruled. Justice Mark Massa dissented, holding that when Clark dropped a bag as police approached, it provided reasonable suspicion, as did Clark’s subsequent admission that the bag contained marijuana.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Mario A. Allen v. State of Indiana
46A04-1203-CR-143
Criminal. Affirms conviction for attempted robbery, a Class B felony, attempted robbery, a Class B felony, and adjudication as a habitual offender. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting into evidence Allen’s arrest report and a co-defendant’s handwritten statement to police. Also rules the trial court properly excluded Allen’s proffered exhibit of an undated taxi cab receipt. Concludes the evidence was sufficient to sustain Allen’s conviction and that Allen abandoned his request for an early trial.

Anonymous, M.D. and Life Care Centers of America, Inc., d/b/a Lane House v. Evelyn Hendricks
79A04-1304-CT-185        
Civil tort. Reverses and remands the denial of Lane House’s motion to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration. Rules although Hendricks did not sign the arbitration agreement herself, she expressly authorized her health care representative to sign and she is now bound by that signing. Also finds that language in the agreement clearly indicates while the National Arbitration Forum is the preferred arbitrator, another arbitration service or method can be used.  

Lifeline Youth & Family Services v. Installed Building Products, Inc. d/b/a Momper Insulation
02A03-1211-CT-502
Civil tort. Affirms trial court denial of motion to correct error over a jury’s award of damages resulting from a fire. Lifeline sought an order to increase the jury’s award of damages from 55 percent of the loss to 100 percent, but the panel ruled that evidence Lifeline relied on to make its argument was not properly before the court because no transcript had been provided.

Brenda Hall v. Dallman Contractors, LLC, Shook, LLC and AT&T Services, Inc.
49A02-1210-CT-806
Civil tort. Reverses and remands a trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of AT&T Services Inc. The court found there are issues of material fact concerning whether AT&T Services was Hall’s employer or a joint employer, and that the company has not established that Hall’s negligence claim against it was barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Worker’s Compensation Act.

Anthony Michael Davis v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1302-CR-57
Criminal. Affirms six-year sentence for conviction of Class C felony operating a vehicle after a lifetime suspension.

David Barbee v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-0907-CR-370
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to correct error challenging his convictions of murder and Class C felony carrying a handgun without a license.

Billye D. Gaulden v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A04-1212-CR-651
Criminal. Affirms conviction and 50-year sentence for conviction of Class B felony robbery and two counts of Class D felony resisting law enforcement.

Carlos Lamonte Minor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A05-1302-CR-85
Criminal. Affirms 12-year sentence for conviction of Class B felony voluntary manslaughter.

Jennifer Barber v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1208-CR-395
Criminal. Affirms convictions of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated and Class C misdemeanor failure to stop and remain at the scene of an accident.

Sanders Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1211-CR-904
Criminal. Affirms conviction of murder and being a habitual offender.

Ryan Schonabaum v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A04-1302-CR-44
Criminal. Affirms 50-year sentence for conviction of two counts of Class A felony child molesting.

Certain Properties Being Sold for Delinquent Taxes; Tax Sale Certificate #3910192 Parcel #39-0-17-114-024.000-007; Norman Eggers v. MLP Services, LLP and Jefferson County, IN. Auditor, et al. (NFP)
39A01-1211-MI-527
Miscellaneous. Affirms issuance of a tax deed to MLP Services and remands to the trial court to determine damages for an appeal brought in bad faith.

The Indiana Supreme Court and Tax Court issued no opinions prior to IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana decisions prior to IL deadline.

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. 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?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT