Indiana Court of Appeals
Yvonne Malukutila v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Yvonne Malukutila’s conviction of Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent of 0.15 or more and Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Also affirms an enhancement for both counts based on her previous conviction of operating a vehicle while intoxicated. Finds Malukutila invited any error by stipulating to the facts in the enhancement phase of her trial without the intervention of a jury. However, remands to the trial court to vacate the conviction on Count II and have the written sentencing order reflect that Count II was merged with Count I and that Count II was vacated.
Omar Sharif Mosley v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Omar Mosley’s aggregate four-year sentence for conviction of Level 6 felony leaving the scene of an accident with serious bodily injury; Class A misdemeanor reckless driving; Class B misdemeanor false informing; and Class C misdemeanor operating a motor vehicle without ever receiving a license. Finds his sentence is not inappropriate.
Marcus Lloyd v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Marcus Lloyd’s conviction of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. Finds the evidence presented was sufficient to rebut Lloyd’s claim of self-defense.
Salatheo Isiah Moss v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms the revocation of Salatheo Moss’s placement in community corrections. Finds there is sufficient to establish that Moss possessed a controlled substance, in violation of the terms of his community corrections placement.
Mark A. Eason, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Mark Eason Jr.’s conviction of Level 2 felony dealing in a controlled substance and Level 2 felony dealing in a narcotic drug. Finds there is sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Mark Riley v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Reverses the Marion Superior Court’s order increasing Mark Riley’s bail amount after he failed to appear at a pretrial conference due to his incarceration in another matter. Finds the trial court abused its discretion in sua sponte increasing Riley’s bail to ensure the jail transported him to court on his next hearing date.
Robin R. Shinkle v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms Robin Shinkle’s 17½-year sentence for his conviction of Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine. Finds his sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.
In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: D.S. (Minor Child) and K.W. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services, and Child Advocates, Inc. (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination. Affirms the involuntary termination of mother K.W.’s parental rights to her son, D.S. Finds that the evidence supports the Marion Superior Court’s determination that termination of K.W.’s parental rights was in D.S.’s best interest.
In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of R.W. (Minor Child) and B.W. (Mother) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination. Affirms the involuntary termination of mother B.W.’s parental rights to her minor child, R.W. Finds the termination was not clearly erroneous and that clear and convincing evidence supports the trial court’s conclusion that adoption is a satisfactory plan for the care and treatment of R.W. and that termination of B.W.’s rights is in the child’s best interests.
Ethan A. Cox v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Ethan Cox’s aggregate four-year sentence for conviction of Level 6 felony counts of criminal recklessness with a deadly weapon, resisting law enforcement using a vehicle and operating a vehicle after being a habitual traffic violator; and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. Finds the sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offenses and Cox’s character.
Kathleen Rexroat v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Kathleen Rexroat’s conviction of Class A misdemeanor criminal mischief after she purposefully drove into an overhead garage door. Finds a reasonable factfinder could find the element of loss of at least $750 proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Morgan J. Braun v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Morgan Braun’s conviction of Level 3 felony neglect of a dependent. Finds the Allen Superior Court did not commit fundamental error when it admitted certain evidence.
Luis Fuerte v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Post conviction. Affirms the denial of Luis Fuerte’s petition for post-conviction relief. Finds the Lake Superior Court properly determined that issues argued by Fuerte relating to freestanding claims of trial court error could not be raised on PCR because issues available but not raised on direct appeal may not be raised in a subsequent PCR petition. Also finds Fuerte failed to prove that he suffered ineffective assistance of counsel.
Michael Wise Sr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms the Hamilton Superior Court did not abuse its discretion by denying Michael Wise Sr.’s request to modify his aggregate 16-year sentence for conviction of Class C felony check fraud by altering his placement. Finds that because Wise exceeded the authorized number of filings, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying his motion.
In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: F.S. and A.S. (Minor Children) and A.N. (Mother) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination. Affirms the involuntary termination of mother A.N.’s parental rights to two of her minor children, F.S. and A.S. Finds that the evidence supports the Tippecanoe Superior Court’s determination that termination was in the children’s best interests.
Demarco Delray Johnson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Post conviction. Affirms the denial of Demarco Delray Johnson’s petition for post-conviction relief. Finds the Vanderburgh Superior Court did not clearly err in concluding Johnson’s trial court was not ineffective; in concluding he is not entitled to a new trial based on a juror’s alleged misconduct; or in finding he was not denied the right to an impartial jury.