ILNews

Pence signs criminal code update, mental health witness bills into law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Gov. Mike Pence this week has signed numerous bills into law, including the legislation that reconciles conflicts between HEA 1006-2013, which reformed the state’s criminal code, and other bills touching on criminal law.

Legislation Pence has signed include:
•    House Enrolled Act 1006, reconciles the technical and substantive conflicts between the criminal code legislation passed last year and other criminal law bills, as well as HEA 1269, a HEA 1006-2013 follow-up;
•    HEA 1008, publication of list of criminal offenses;
•    HEA 1155, expungement;
•    HEA 1347, Circuit Court clerk administrative matters, which also includes language on Indiana’s small claims courts;
•    Senate Enrolled Act 3, deals with the use and possession of firearms by judicial officers and battery on judicial officers;
•    SEA 36, probate, trust and transfer on death matters;
•    SEA 59, guardian filing for dissolution of marriage, which is a topic the Indiana Court of Appeals has addressed recently;
•    SEA 88, mental health witnesses in criminal cases;
•    SEA 138, victim advocates in civil proceedings; and
•    SEA 235, allows Marion Superior Court to establish a three-year mental health pilot project that requires community corrections to reduce recidivism by using evidence-based services, programs and practices.

The governor has seven days from receiving a bill to sign it or veto it. If he takes no action on it during that time frame, the bill automatically becomes law. A complete list of bills waiting for the governor’s signature is available on his Bill Watch page.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT