Search Results

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Chasity M. Turpen, v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-3024

Appeal from the Lawrence Superior Court, Pro Tem Judge Robert R. Cline. Chasity M. Turpen appeals the trial court’s order of restitution, which the court reversed. Turpen contended that she did not plead guilty to the criminal mischief charge, thus there was no factual basis for a restitution order regarding that allegation. The court agreed with Turpen, concluding that the plea agreement did not constitute an agreement for restitution for actions related to the dismissed charge. Judge Brown authored the opinion, with Judges Altice and DeBoer concurring. Appellant’s attorney: Nicholas J. Moll, Lawrence County Public Defender Agency, Bedford, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Jeremiah Shanks v. State of Indiana
No. 25A-CR-1539

Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge James K. Snyder. Jeremiah Shanks was convicted of murder, armed robbery, and unlawful possession of a firearm following the shooting death of Elijah Martin during a gun deal. He appealed, claiming his convictions for murder and armed robbery constitute double jeopardy. The court agreed, noting that the state failed to rebut the presumption of a double jeopardy violation because both offenses stemmed from a single continuous act — the shooting being the force element in the robbery charge. The court reversed the armed robbery conviction and remanded for its vacation. Judge Scheele authored the opinion, with Judge Felix concurring and Judge Brown dissenting. Brown writes that he would affirm both convictions, finding that murder and robbery are two distinct, chargeable crimes and therefore the continuous crime doctrine does not apply. Appellant’s attorneys: Talisha Griffin, Sarah Medlin, Marion County Public Defender Agency, Indianapolis, Indiana. Appellee’s attorney: Office of the Indiana Attorney General.

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

Indiana Court of Appeals
Madison Futa and Sarah Denunzio v. Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Inc., Saint Joseph High School, John Kennedy, Debra Brown, and Justin Cochran
No. 25A-CT-2216

Appeal from the St. Joseph Circuit Court, Special Judge Michael A. Christofeno. The court affirms the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for the defendants, finding that the plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred by Indiana’s two-year statute of limitations. The court determined that the claims accrued when the plaintiffs graduated from high school, well before the filing of the complaint, and rejected arguments about tolling based on COVID-19, the discovery rule, continuing wrong, and fraudulent concealment. The plaintiffs had not demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact that would preclude summary judgment. Judge Mathias authored the opinion, with Judges May and Felix concurring. Appellants’ attorneys: Brandon E. Tate, Katherine A. Piscione, Waldron Tate Land LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana. Attorneys for appellees Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, St. Joseph High School, John Kennedy and Debra Brown: Lyle R. Hardman, Hunt Suedhoff Kearney, LLP, South Bend, Indiana; and Robert T. Keen Jr., Barrett McNagny LLP, Fort Wayne, Indiana. Attorneys for appellee Justin Cochran: Kenneth E. Biggins, Jr. and Jeremy J. McDonald, Lee and Zalas, P.C., South Bend, Indiana.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Michael A. Conley Sr. v. USA Track & Field Inc.
25A-CT-2995

Civil tort. Interlocutory appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Judge Christina R. Klineman. Affirms the denial of Michael A. Conley Sr.’s motion to compel arbitration in a dispute with USA Track & Field Inc. stemming from allegations that Conley breached his fiduciary duties as board chairman during the 2024 Olympic marathon trials bidding process. Holds that USATF’s bylaw requiring arbitration applies only to controversies involving its recognition as a national governing body, and Conley’s alleged misconduct — including communications and coordination with a board member tied to a disqualified bid — does not constitute such a controversy. Concludes that resolution of USATF’s claims against Conley will not affect USATF’s recognition status and therefore does not trigger mandatory arbitration. Judge Mathias authored the opinion. Judges May and Felix concur. Appellant attorneys: Daniel R. Kelley, Nicholas R. Burris, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP; Deirdre A. Close, Croke, Fairchild, Duarte & Beres LLP. Appellee attorneys: Jonathan D. Mattingly, Hamish S. Cohen, Brian R. Weir-Harden, Jeffrey N. Furminger, Mattingly Burke Cohen & Biederman LLP.

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