`

Opinions Dec. 15, 2016

December 15, 2016
KEYWORDS Opinions

Indiana Court of Appeals
Robert W. Adams v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
02A03-1512-CR-2149
Criminal. Affirms the denial of Robert W. Adams’ motion for jail-time credit against his sentence in the New Castle prison. Finds that whatever merit Adams’ claim has lies beyond the record he submitted and beyond what a court may consult when reviewing a motion to correct an erroneous sentence. Thus, the Allen Superior Court judge did not abuse her discretion by denying Adams’ motion to additional credit time.

Larry Crume v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
46A04-1510-CR-1805
Criminal. Affirms Larry Crume’s convictions of murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder and his sentence to an aggregate 120 years. Finds that the trial court did not err when it consolidated Crume’s trial with Johnny McSwain’s trial, and when it failed to sever the conspiracy charge from the murder and attempted murder charges. Also finds that the evidence is sufficient to support Crume’s conspiracy conviction and that his 120-year aggregate sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and the character of the offender.

Trevis Stokes v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A04-1604-CR-852
Criminal. Affirms Trevis Stokes’ conviction of Level 6 felony resisting law enforcement with a vehicle. Finds that from the evidence, the jury could reasonably conclude that Stokes fled from Trooper Magee.

L.C. Strong v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
45A03-1512-CR-2315
Criminal. Affirms L.C. Strong’s conviction for murder. Finds that the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction and that the prosecutor did not commit misconduct.

M.S. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
06A01-1606-JT-1260
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the termination of M.S.’s parental rights to A.R. and B.S. Finds that the Department of Child Services has presented clear and convincing evidence that the conditions that resulted in the children’s removal from and continued placement outside M.S.’s care remain unchanged and that termination of parental rights was in the best interests of the children. Also finds that the evidence established a satisfactory plan for the children’s care and treatment following termination. Finally, finds that M.S. failed to establish reversible error.
 

ADVERTISEMENT