ILNews

Opinions Sept. 30, 2013

September 30, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Opinions, Sept. 30, 2013

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeffrey Archer v. State of Indiana

49A05-1209-CR-448
Criminal. Affirms Class A felony conviction of child molestation, rejecting arguments that the trial court’s statement about the victim’s competency was an impermissible vouching statement and that the court improperly allowed vouching statements by multiple witnesses. The court’s denial of Archer’s request to present evidence of the victim’s post-allegation demeanor also was proper, as were jury instructions and the effectiveness of Archer’s trial counsel.

Paul J. Livers II, v. State of Indiana
06A01-1303-CR-119
Criminal. Affirms convictions for battery causing bodily injury, a Class A misdemeanor, and interference with reporting a crime, a Class C misdemeanor. Livers claims his counsel was ineffective because the attorney failed to file a motion for a jury trial in a timely manner. The COA finds the trial court record does not indicate that Livers wanted a jury trial prior to his trial counsel’s belated requested. Also rejects Livers’ argument that the testimony of the victim was incredibly dubious.

Joseph M. Guinn v. Applied Composites Engineering, Inc.
49A02-1303-CC-239
Civil. Reverses grant of summary judgment in favor of Applied Composites Engineering Inc., and remands to the trial court for consideration of Joseph Guinn’s claim of tortious interference with a contract due to ACE’s enforcement of a non-compete clause that resulted in his termination from a subsequent employer. Summary judgment was improper because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether ACE’s conduct was justified, fair or reasonable under the circumstances.

Amy Palmer v. Margaret Sales and Unique Insurance Company
45A03-1302-SC-31
Small claims. Reverses denial of motion for change of judge and motion for jury trial and remands with instructions to grant change of judge, implement procedures for the selection of a new judge and transfer the case to the plenary docket, the majority holding that the question of timeliness of a change of judge request should be guided by the dissenting opinion in McClure v. Cooper, 893 N.E.2d 337 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). Judge Mark Bailey, who wrote the McClure opinion, dissented in part, finding that the court shouldn’t reach McClure, which he acknowledged may have been wrongly decided, and that because Palmer acknowledged liability, proceedings on remand should be limited to the matter of damages.

William A. Asher v. Stephanie J. Coomler
49A04-1302-DR-71
Domestic relation. Reverses trial court modification of child support, holding that a magistrate was not within the class of judicial officers specified in Trial Rules for selection of a special judge and therefore could not have presided after appointment of a special judge. Remands to the trial court with instructions to permit the parties to select a successor special judge.

David M. Green v. State of Indiana
45A03-1210-PC-418
Post-conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief from his sentence of two consecutive 45-year sentences for his conviction of two counts of murder, concluding that a defense attorney’s failure to object to an anonymous jury was not ineffective assistance of counsel.

Tom Trisler d/b/a Canal House Antiques v. Clayton L. Carter
35A02-1302-SC-192
Small claim. Reverses the trial court’s order that Trisler reimburse Carter the purchase price for a chest of drawers. Rules when Carter bought the piece of furniture at the antiques store, he did not expect the business would remedy any defect. Consequently he has no legitimate reason to revoke his acceptance of the chest of drawers.

Gary Oswalt v. State of Indiana
35A02-1208-CR-684
Criminal. Affirms conviction and aggregate sentence of 84 years for two counts of child molesting as Class A felonies, child solicitation as a Class D felony, and five counts of possession of child pornography as Class D felonies. Rules Oswalt did not exhaust his peremptory challenges and therefore waived review of the trial court’s denial of his request to strike Juror No. 28 for cause. Finds the five charges for possession of child pornography fell within the statutory limitations period. Concludes that the evidence was sufficient to sustain Oswalt’s convictions for five counts of possession of child pornography and that Oswalt failed to demonstrate he was denied a fair trial due to the charges of possession of child pornography. Upholds the sentence as appropriate considering the nature of the offense and the character of Oswalt.

In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.C., R.C., and B.C., Minor Children and R.C., Father v. Indiana Department of Child Services (NFP)
72A01-1301-JT-35
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of R.C.’s (father) parental rights to K.C., R.C. and B.C.

Joseph A. Taylor v. Dr. William H. Wolfe, in his Individual Capacity as an Employee of Corizon and Medical Director at the Pendleton Correctional Facility, Corizon, Inc., and Pharma Corr, (NFP)
48A05-1212-PL-638
Civil Plenary. Affirms dismissal of Taylor’s complaint against Wolfe, Corizon Inc. and Pharma Corr for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

In the Matter of; H.B., G.M., P.M., and A.C. (Minors), C.M. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services and Lake County Court Appointed Special Advocate (NFP)
45A03-1302-JT-62
Juvenile. Affirms order terminating C.M.’s (mother) parental rights to her minor children, H.B., G.M., P.M. and A.C.

Gerald W. Staton v. Dawn M. Dobyns-Gross, Indiana Family Social Services Administration, Tippecanoe County, Indiana and Tippecanoe County Prosecutor (NFP)
79A02-1305-CT-412
Civil Tort. Affirms denial of Staton’s motion to correct error and the dismissal of Staton’s complaint.

Mark Burkett v. State of Indiana (NFP)
09A04-1305-CR-262
Criminal. Affirms 20-year sentence for criminal confinement, a Class B felony.

Brandon Stewart v. State of Indiana (NFP)
45A03-1301-CR-6
Criminal. Affirms conviction for two counts child molesting, both Class A felonies, one count sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class B felony, one count child molesting, a Class C felony, and one count sexual misconduct with a minor, a Class C felony. Also affirms aggregate sentence of 46 years.
 
The Indiana Supreme Court and the Indiana Tax Court issued no opinions by IL deadline. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued no Indiana opinions by 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