The Indiana Supreme Court is set to hear argument in several cases this week, including a man’s post-conviction appeal of his three separate sentences for murder in Floyd County.
Justice will hear argument in William Clyde Gibson, III v. State of Indiana, No. 22S00-1601-PD-00009 at 10:30 a.m. Thursday. Gibson was convicted of murder in three separate cases. He was sentenced to death in two of those cases and to a term of 65 years in the third case. Gibson’s two death sentences were affirmed on direct appeal in Gibson v. State, 43 N.E.3d 231 (Ind. 2015) and Gibson v. State, 51 N.E.3d 204 (Ind. 2016), respectively.
Subsequently, the Floyd Superior Court denied Gibson’s petitions for post-conviction relief in all three cases following a combined evidentiary hearing. Gibson appealed in all three cases. His two capital cases come directly to the high court, with the third as a petition to transfer after the Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief in Gibson v. State, No. 22A01-1711-PC-2528 (Ind. Ct. App. July 16, 2018).
Justices will also hear argument at 9 a.m. Thursday in Derrick T. Cardosi v. State of Indiana, No. 18S-LW-00181. Derrick Cardosi was sentenced to life without parole in Newton County for three counts of murder, two counts of Level 5 felony assisting a criminal and Level 6 felony auto theft.
On appeal, Cardosi contests his convictions and LWOP sentence in . He argues the evidence was insufficient to support some of the convictions. Cardosi also contends the trial court erred by failing to adequately admonish the jurors during separations and after the case was submitted to them, by admitting statements of a co-conspirator, by instructing jurors on accomplice liability and by sentencing him based on non-statutory aggravating circumstances.
Additionally, justices will hear the case of Daniel T. O'Bryant, et al. v. Alan P. Adams, et al., No. 18S-PL-00584 at 9:45 a.m. Thursday. O’Bryant sued A.L.A. Trucking in the Madison Circuit Court, alleging breach of contract. A.L.A. filed a motion to dismiss the complaint under Trial Rule 12(B)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing the complaint is barred because the contract includes a forum-selection clause requiring O’Bryant to sue in Texas, not Indiana.
The trial court dismissed the complaint, and the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed, citing Rule 12(B)(2) and finding the forum selection clause unambiguous and enforceable, requiring O’Bryant to sue in Texas.