ILNews

Opinions Sept. 22, 2011

September 22, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

7th Circuit had posted no opinions from Indiana courts at IL deadline.

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
An-Hung Yao and Yu-Ting Lin v. State of Indiana
35A02-1006-CR-678
Criminal. Affirms order dismissing the Class D felony counterfeiting charges against Yao and Lin and reverses the denial of their motion to dismiss counts of Class D felony theft and Class C felony corrupt business influence. The trial court lacked territorial jurisdiction because there is no evidence any conduct that is an element of the alleged offenses occurred in Indiana. Remands for the trial court to dismiss the remaining charges.

Heather Zion v. State of Indiana (NFP)
48A02-1103-CR-176
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class C felony robbery, Class C felony forgery, and Class D felony fraud.

In the Matter of Term. of the Parent-Child Rel. of M.G., M.G., E.G.; M.G. v. The Indiana Dept. for Child Svcs. (NFP)

49A05-1101-JT-23
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.

D.M. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

49A02-1102-JV-216
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication as a delinquent child for committing what would be Class B felony robbery and Class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm if committed by an adult.

Donald R. Bloss v. State of Indiana (NFP)

20A03-1102-MI-60
Miscellaneous. Affirms determination that Bloss is a habitual traffic violator.

Quanardel Wells v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1012-CR-731
Criminal. Affirms denial of motion to sever the offenses for separate trials with respect to each victim.

Carol Curran v. Rhonda Curran-Wert (NFP)

30A04-1101-GU-19
Guardianship. Affirms order terminating Carol Curran’s guardianship of Rhonda Curran-Wert.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT