ILNews

Supreme Court denies transfer to four

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Can I get this form on line,if not where can I obtain one. I am eligible.

  2. What a fine example of the best of the Hoosier tradition! How sad that the AP has to include partisan snark in the obit for this great American patriot and adventurer.

  3. Why are all these lawyers yakking to the media about pending matters? Trial by media? What the devil happened to not making extrajudicial statements? The system is falling apart.

  4. It is a sad story indeed as this couple has been only in survival mode, NOT found guilty with Ponzi, shaken down for 5 years and pursued by prosecution that has been ignited by a civil suit with very deep pockets wrenched in their bitterness...It has been said that many of us are breaking an average of 300 federal laws a day without even knowing it. Structuring laws, & civilForfeiture laws are among the scariest that need to be restructured or repealed . These laws were initially created for drug Lords and laundering money and now reach over that line. Here you have a couple that took out their own money, not drug money, not laundering. Yes...Many upset that they lost money...but how much did they make before it all fell apart? No one ask that question? A civil suit against Williams was awarded because he has no more money to fight...they pushed for a break in order...they took all his belongings...even underwear, shoes and clothes? who does that? What allows that? Maybe if you had the picture of him purchasing a jacket at the Goodwill just to go to court the next day...his enemy may be satisfied? But not likely...bitterness is a master. For happy ending lovers, you will be happy to know they have a faith that has changed their world and a solid love that many of us can only dream about. They will spend their time in federal jail for taking their money from their account, but at the end of the day they have loyal friends, a true love and a hope of a new life in time...and none of that can be bought or taken That is the real story.

  5. Could be his email did something especially heinous, really over the top like questioning Ind S.Ct. officials or accusing JLAP of being the political correctness police.

ADVERTISEMENT