The Indiana Supreme Court denied transfer in four cases June 3. As of today’s Indiana Lawyer daily deadline,
the court had not yet posted transfers since those from the week ending June 4.
The court denied transfer to the following cases:
James
Henley v. State of Indiana, No. 49A02-0908-CR-711, a not-for-publication opinion that affirmed Henley’s conviction
of intimidation and sentence, which was enhanced by a habitual offender finding.
David
Burks-Bey v. State of Indiana, No. 49A02-0903-PC-231, a not-for-publication opinion that affirmed a denial of motion
to correct an erroneous sentence.
Gideon
Samid v. Virginia Spencer, No. 06A01-0901-CV-45, a not-for-publication opinion that affirmed the trial court’s
denial of Samid’s motion to correct error and remanded for determination of Spencer’s appellate attorneys’
fees in a case involving a protective order.
Robert
L. Scott v. State of Indiana, No. 79A05-0812-CR-746, a for-publication case that considered Scott’s convictions
of two counts of Class B felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon; one count of Class C felony battery with
a deadly weapon; one count of Class D felony of pointing a firearm; and one count of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.
In this case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s handling of the case regarding its discretion in admitting
evidence obtained from Scott’s residence and in admitting certain evidence in its determination that Scott was a serious
violent felon. But the Court of Appeals reversed that decision regarding the trial court’s refusal to give a tendered
instruction as to whether a gun in question was loaded.














I highly recommend Deanna and her team of professionals that serve the legal community. Great information and many thanks for sharing.
they are pushing these cases against lawyers too far. thought-crime.
vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!
Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.
With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.