The following 7th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Monday:
United States of America v. Michael Price
Criminal. Vacates and remands Michael Price’s 110-month sentence. Finds the Southern Indiana District Court erred by relying on an incorrect paraphrase of U.S.S.G. §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) when enhancing Price’s sentence instead of considering the actual language, which limits the enhancement to situations where the firearm is involved in, or contributed to, the other felony.
Indiana Court of Appeals
CT102 LLC d/b/a Metro Motors and Herman Jeffrey Baker v. Automotive Finance Corporation
Civil collection. Reverses the amount in damages awarded to Automotive Finance Corporation, finding the Marion Superior Court erred by double counting. Affirms the finding that Metro Motors did not commit conversion, finding the trial court did not err. Remands with instructions to award AFC $123,666.66, plus 15% interest from May 30, 2018, and $32,618.75 in attorney fees and expenses.
Derek Gaddis v. State of Indiana
Criminal. Affirms the revocation of Derek Gaddis’s probation. Finds the Fayette Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the probation and sentencing Gaddis to two years in the Indiana Department of Correction. Also finds that because addis did not connect his new crime to his poor mental health, the trial court was not required to consider Gaddis’ mental health during the revocation proceeding.
Mark Baker v. Adam Pickering, Kathleen Pickering, Lauren Flanagan, and Kesslerwood East Lake Association, Inc.
Miscellaneous. Dismisses Mark Baker’s appeal of the denial of his motion for relief from order in a dispute with Adam and Kathleen Pickering, Lauren Flanagan and the Kesslerwood East Lake Association Inc. Finds the trial court’s arbitration order was not a final judgment under Appellate Rule 2(H). Also finds the Indiana Arbitration Act does not provide for the immediate appealability of an order compelling arbitration, and the trial court’s order neither disposed of all claims nor certified the order as a partial final judgment pursuant to Trial Rule 54(B). Finally, finds Baker’s appeal is not a proper interlocutory appeal because he didn’t follow the procedure specified in Appellate Rule 14.
In re the Adoption of M.D.W.: M.W. v. R.C. (mem. dec.)
Adoption. Affirms in part, reverses in part the grant of maternal grandmother R.C.’s petition to adopt grandchild M.D.W. Finds that father M.W.’s consent is not required but that the juvenile court erred by failing to issue findings regarding the child’s best interest. Remands in part with instructions for the juvenile court to enter proper findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the best interests of the child.
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.T., Father, and C.T. and J.T., Minor Children, A.T. v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the termination of father A.T.’s parental rights to his minor children, C.T. and J.T. Finds the termination was supported by clear and convincing evidence.
A.M. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Juvenile. Reverses A.M.’s two true findings for acts that would have constituted rape and criminal confinement if committed by an adult. Accepts the parties’ agreement that A.M.’s dual true findings are a double jeopardy violation. Remands with instructions to vacate the criminal confinement.
Trey Fields v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Criminal. Affirms Trey Fields’ 37-year sentence for Level 4 felony stalking, Level 5 felony battery against a public-safety official, Level 5 felony disarming a law enforcement officer, Level 6 felony resisting law enforcement, Level 6 felony escape and for being a habitual offender. Finds the Madison Circuit Court did not rely on an improper aggravator.
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of T.A. (Minor Child); R.A. (Father) v. Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
Juvenile termination of parental rights. Affirms the termination of father R.A.’s parental rights to his minor child, T.A. Finds the Department of Child Services has shown by clear and convincing evidence that there is a reasonable probability that the conditions that resulted in T.A.’s removal or the reasons for placement outside of R.A.’s home will not be remedied, that termination is in the best interests of the child and that DCS has a satisfactory plan for the care and treatment of the child. Also finds the Elkhart Circuit Court did not err.