July 10, 2026

Indiana Court of Appeals
Latrell Vaughn v. State of Indiana
No. 26A-CR-306

Appeal from the St. Joseph Superior Coirt, Judge David L. Francisco. Vaughn appeals his 40-year sentence for robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, asserting that his appeal should be permitted despite an appeal waiver in his plea agreement. The court finds that Vaughn has waived appellate review of his sentence as the waiver explicitly covered his challenges, including the firearm enhancement and the proportionality of his sentence. The court concludes that Vaughn’s arguments do not fit the exceptions to enforcing such waivers. Judge Felix authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge Bradford concurring. Appellant’s attorney: A. Robert Masters, St. Joseph County Deputy Public Defender, Nemeth, Feeney Masters & Campiti PC, South Bend, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Rita Tafelski v. Shawn P. Ryan
No. 26A-CT-141

Appeal from the St. Joseph Superior Court, Judge Jamie C. Woods. Rita Tafelski appeals the denial of her request to amend discovery deadlines and the entry of summary judgment in favor of Shawn P. Ryan. The court reverses and remands, finding that the denial of Tafelski’s motion to amend deadlines was inconsistent with the facts of the case and effectively deprived her of the opportunity to present her claim for legal malpractice. The panel noted that the potential prejudice to Ryan was minimal compared to the significant impact on Tafelski’s ability to present her case. Judge Brown authored the opinion, with Judges Bailey and Weissmann concurring. Appellant’s attorneys: Gabriel A. Hawkins and Brett B. Thomas, CohenMalad LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorneys: Dina M. Cox and J. Neal Bowling, Lewis Wagner & Trimble, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Christain Z. Wall v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-1767

Appeal from the Elkhart Circuit Court, Judge Michael A. Christofeno. The court affirms in part, reverses in part, and remands with instructions. The court finds the state presented sufficient evidence to rebut Wall’s claim of self-defense and the trial court did not commit fundamental error regarding jury instructions. However, the court found that Indiana Code section 35-50-2-11(i) prohibited sentencing Wall on both firearm enhancements tied to his murder convictions, thus reversing one of those enhancements. Additionally, Wall’s amended sentence was deemed appropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B). Judge Felix authored the opinion, and Judges May and Mathias concur. Appellant’s attorney: Lisa M. Johnson, Brownsburg, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

The following opinion was issued on July 9 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
USA v. Eric Kendrick
No. 25-2067

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Chief Judge James R. Sweeney II. Affirms the judgment of the district court. Eric Kendrick entered a conditional guilty plea to conspiracy to possess and distribute controlled substances, challenging the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained from a pole camera monitoring his property. The court held that the use of the pole camera did not constitute an illegal search under the Fourth Amendment because the activities observed were outside Kendrick’s reasonable expectation of privacy, given the openings in the fence surrounding his business property. Judge Ripple authored the opinion, with Judges Easterbrook and Lee concurring.

This content was created with the assistance of artificial intelligence and has been reviewed by an editor for accuracy.