Opinions Feb. 17, 2020

Indiana Supreme Court
Collins Asset Group, LLC v. Alkhemer Alialy|
19S-CC-531
Civil collection. Reverses and remands the Hamilton Superior Court’s dismissal of a complaint brought by Collins Asset Group LLC for missed payments on a promissory note entered into by Alkhemer Alialy. Finds that CAG can assert its claim under either Ind. Code § 34-11-2-9 (2019) or § 26-1-3.1-118(a) (2019).

Dean Blair and Paula Blair v. EMC Mortgage, LLC
19S-MF-530
Mortgage foreclosure. Affirms the Vanderburgh Superior Court’s order foreclosing Dean and Paula Blair’s mortgage after a bench trial. Finds no need to impose a rule of reasonableness when a lender sues for payment on a closed installment contract. Concludes that EMC Mortgage could have recovered the full amount owed under the two applicable statutes of limitations. However, because EMC expressly disclaimed any argument for full relief, declines to grant relief beyond what EMC sought.

Indiana Court of Appeals

State of Indiana v. Tonia Jones-Elliott
19A-PL-00588
Civil plenary. Reverses the Crawford Circuit Court’s grant of Tonia Jones-Elliott’s untimely motions for a continuance to respond to the state’s request for summary judgment in its suit against Jones-Elliott for having allegedly failed to withhold certain employee insurance contributions from her own paychecks. Finds the trial court abused its discretion in granting the untimely motions. Remands for further proceedings on the state’s motion for summary judgment.

Agapito Diaz III v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-1359
Criminal. Affirms in part, reverses in part Agapito Diaz III’s conviction of murder, Level 1 felony attempted murder, Level 3 felony attempted armed robbery, Level 4 felony unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and Level 5 felony criminal recklessness. Finds Diaz’s convictions for felony murder and attempted armed robbery violate double jeopardy principles. Remands with instructions for the trial court to vacate Diaz’s conviction for attempted armed robbery. Finds Diaz’s 101-year sentence is not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offenses and his character, among other things.

Mekeisha Diamond Roberts v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-2369
Criminal. Affirms Mekeisha Roberts’ aggregate 12-year sentence with three years suspended to supervised probation and restitution orders totaling $288,712.34 for conviction of Level 5 felonies causing death when operating a vehicle while intoxicated and causing serious bodily injury when operating a vehicle while intoxicated and Class A misdemeanors driving while suspended and operating a motor vehicle without ever receiving a license with a prior offense. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering Roberts to pay restitution as part of her sentence and that her sentence is not inappropriate.

Darrick Scott Sullivan v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-2284
Criminal. Remands Darrick Sullivan’s eight-and-a-half-year sentence for conviction of Level 5 felony robbery, Level 6 felony criminal confinement, and Class B misdemeanor battery. Finds the case should be remanded to the Henry Circuit Court to correct the internal inconsistency in the sentencing order such that Sullivan’s aggregate term is capped at seven years. Remands with instructions for the trial court to correct the sentencing order and the abstract of judgment consistent with the opinion.

Saul Hernandez-Ramirez v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-1458
Criminal. Affirms Saul Hernandez-Ramirez’s murder conviction. Finds sufficient evidence to support the conviction.

Major Loren Wilson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-1605
Criminal. Affirms Major Wilson’s aggregate 87½-year sentence for conviction of two counts of Class B felony criminal deviate conduct, Class B felony burglary and Class D felony criminal confinement. Finds no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s sentencing.

Dominic Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A-CR-1693
Criminal. Affirms the revocation of Dominic Jones’ probation. Finds the St. Joseph Superior Court did not commit fundamental error in allowing a deputy to testify to information he learned in the course of his investigation. Finds sufficient evidence to support the revocation.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Story Continues Below