Court of Appeals of Indiana
Cody Moore v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms the denial of Cody Moore’s motion to suppress. Finds the Marion Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in denying Moore’s motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of a traffic stop.
Craig Randolph v. Karen A. Randolph
Domestic relations with children. Affirms the Allen Superior Court’s orders in the dissolution of the marriage of Craig and Karen Randolph. Finds the trial court did not err by restricting Craig’s parenting time with their child, including his premarital retirement account in the marital estate or awarding Karen 60% of the marital estate. Also finds Karen is not entitled to appellate attorney fees.
In the Matter of the Adoption of A.R.; J.R. v. J.M. (mem. dec.)
Adoption. Affirms the grant of stepfather J.M.’s petition to adopt A.R., the biological daughter of J.R. Finds the Johnson Superior Court did not clearly err in finding that J.R.’s consent to the adoption was not necessary because he did not communicate significantly with A.R. for a period of at least one year when he was able to do so, without justifiable cause.
Deonlashawn Cammron Simmons v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Deonlashawn Cammron Simmons’ conviction of murder. Finds the trial court did not err in failing to redact a portion of Simmons’ videotaped interview. Also finds the admission of an ATF report was harmless error. Finally, finds sufficient evidence supports the conviction.
Maurice Lee Lillie, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Maurice Lillie Jr.’s conviction of murder. Finds a witness’s testimony did not violate Lillie’s confrontation rights.
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parental Rights of: C.W.S. (Minor Child), and W.S.V. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the termination of father W.S.V.’s parental rights to C. Finds the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying W.S.V.’s motion to continue the evidentiary hearing. Also finds sufficient evidence supports the juvenile court’s judgment.