ILNews

Opinions Aug. 17, 2010

August 17, 2010
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Cullen Davis Walker v. State of Indiana
71A03-1003-CR-115
Criminal. Affirms Walker’s convictions of burglary, robbery, criminal confinement – all as Class B felonies, and possession of cocaine as a Class C felony. Also affirms his sentence of 56 years. Walker argued his burglary and criminal confinement convictions should be vacated pursuant to the continuing crime doctrine because his offenses were all part of the same continuing crime since they occurred in a short period of time and facilitated his sole purpose of taking things from people at one house. The court ruled each offense was a distinct chargeable crime. Remands with instructions to correct clerical errors in the amended judgment and chronological case summary.

Paternity of M.B., N.B. v. J.W. (NFP)
45A03-0911-PL-536
Civil. Affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands. Rules the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sua sponte modifying the prior child-support order to reflect the mother was not providing overnight parenting time; remands for the court to adjust its order modifying the amount of support owed by mother so that it is prospective in nature only. Also rules the trial court did not abuse its discretion by failing to enforce parenting time because it used its discretionary authority to threaten M.B. and his father with sanctions if M.B. failed to participate in parenting time. It also didn’t abuse its discretion by designating a mid-point for the mother and M.B. to meet for parenting time and by ordering mother to pay dental bills incurred because of her authorization of dental work not covered by M.B.’s insurance.

Mark Stearns v. Amy Taylor-Stearns (NFP)
45A03-0908-CV-380
Civil. Affirms order to strike husband’s motions he filed after court-ordered deadline, and dissolution court did not abuse its discretion finding in husband in contempt and imposing sanction for willful breach of settlement agreement.

In re the Guardianship of C.J.; T.J. v. K.M. (NFP)
27A02-1002-GU-150
Guardianship. Affirms grant of mother K.M.’s petition to terminate stepmother’s guardianship of son, C.J., after the father’s death.

Terry D. McClinton, Jr. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A04-0912-CR-712
Criminal. Affirms aggregate sentence of 28 years for two counts of Class B felony robbery and one count of Class B felony dealing in cocaine.

Breondon D. Pinkson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A05-1002-CR-146
Criminal. Affirms revocation of probation, noting Pinkson was properly notified.

Golden Cummings v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0912-CR-1252
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class C felony battery.

Isidro Lopez-Ruiz v. State of Indiana (NFP)
20A04-0912-CR-707
Criminal. Affirms 48-year sentence for convictions of two counts of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Earl Lee Russelburg v. State of Indiana (NFP)
82A01-1002-CR-113
Criminal. Affirms denial of petition for leave to file a belated notice of appeal.

Kenneth Ramey v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A04-1001-CR-5
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class A felony dealing in cocaine.

Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT