Sept. 3, 2026

Indiana Court of Appeals
Daniel Romero v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3277

Appeal from the Kosciusko Superior Court, Judge Karin A. McGrath. The court affirms the trial court’s decision, ruling that it did not abuse its discretion in denying Romero’s motions to remove a juror and for a mistrial, as well as finding that sufficient evidence supported his conviction for burglary resulting in serious bodily injury. Romero’s claims regarding juror bias and evidence insufficiency were found unpersuasive, with the jury reasonably concluding Romero had committed the crime with intent as he entered the home armed with a handgun and wrench. The court also determined that Romero’s 35-year sentence was appropriate given the severity of the offense and his character, despite his minimal criminal history. Judge Felix authored the opinion, with Chief Judge Tavitas and Judge Bradford concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Nikos C. Nakos, Nakos Law Office, Fort Wayne. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Justin Marquardt v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3073

Appeal from the Hendricks Superior Court, Judge Stephenie LeMay-Luken. Justin Marquardt appeals his convictions for Level 4 felony child molesting, Level 4 felony incest, and Level 5 felony attempted obstruction of justice, as well as the twenty-eight-year sentence imposed. The court affirms the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support them and rejecting the double jeopardy claim, asserting that the charges stem from distinct acts. Additionally, the court concludes that Marquardt’s sentence is not inappropriate based on the nature of the offenses and his character, emphasizing the severe impact of his actions on the child victim. Senior Judge Najam authored the opinion, with Judges May and Scheele concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Audrey K. Lunsford, Lunsford Legal LLC, Indianapolis. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

The following opinion was issued on Sept. 2 after The Indiana Lawyer’s deadline. 

7th Circuit Court of Appeals
USA v. Matthew J. Frazier
No. 24-3286

Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, Judge Damon R. Leichty. Before Circuit Judges Easterbrook, Rovner and Scudder. The decision of the district court is affirmed. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to order a second competency hearing before Frazier waived his right to a jury trial, as the evidence did not call into question his competency. The court also affirmed the imposition of a supervised release condition requiring Frazier to maintain full-time employment, noting that this condition provided options for circumstances where Frazier may be unable to meet the requirement. Judge Rovner authored the opinion. Judges Easterbrook and Scudder concurred.

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