ILNews

Opinions Sept. 9, 2013

September 9, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Opinions Sept. 9, 2013

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals
United States of America v. Christopher Eads

12-2464
Criminal. Affirms conviction and 480-month sentence for distributing child pornography, possessing child pornography and tampering with a witness. Addresses the issues Eads raises on appeal but upholds the decision of the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Finds the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing Eads to represent himself; the conviction for witness tampering was supported by the evidence; a new trial is not warranted because no new evidence has been discovered; and the discussion of 18 U.S.C. 3553 factors at sentencing was sufficient. Agrees with Eads that the district court erred in not thoroughly explaining on the record why it allowed images to be shown to the jury but rules the error is harmless because the additional evidence against him was overwhelming.   

United States of America v. Christopher Spears
11-1683
Criminal. Affirms in part, reverses in part and remands for resentencing on convictions of producing false identification and unlawful possession of false identification. Holds that the federal aggravated identity theft statute USC §1028A’s reference to “another person” may not be extended to fake ID bearing the true name of the recipient, and therefore vacates conviction and two-year sentence.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In the Matter of S.L., and J.L., Children Alleged to be Children In Need of Services, S.B.-L., Mother v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)

79A05-1303-JC-98
Juvenile. Affirms determination that J.L and S.L. are children in need of services.

Jerry Williams v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-1302-PC-133
Post-conviction. Affirms 55-year aggregate sentence imposed by post-conviction relief court on a Class A felony count of criminal deviate conduct and four counts of Class B criminal deviate conduct.

Boubacarr Moussa v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A05-1209-CR-449
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony failure to stop after an accident causing serious bodily injury.

Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Tax Court released no opinions by IL deadline Monday.


 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT