Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowCourt of Appeals of Indiana
Ji J. Lian v. Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County (mem. dec.)
22A-OV-2758
Ordinance violation. Affirms the orders requiring Ji Jing Lian to remedy the various health code violations on the interior and exterior portions of her property by a certain date and, in the event she did not comply, ordering the Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County and/or its contractors to vacate the premises and clean up the exterior, with a resulting lien for the costs incurred. Finds Lian did not raise her Fourth Amendment argument in the Marion Superior Court, so she cannot pursue it on appeal.
Andrew L. Himes v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-3011
Criminal. Affirms Andrew L. Himes’ conviction of Level 3 felony rape and his 36-year sentence. Finds Himes’ proposed evidence violated the Rape Shield Statute, so the Elkhart Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in excluding it. Also finds the evidence was sufficient to find Himes guilty. Finally, finds the trial court did not abuse its sentencing discretion, and Himes’ sentence is not inappropriate.
N.F. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-JV-497
Juvenile. Affirms N.F.’s adjudication as a delinquent child for what would be Class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm and Class A misdemeanor unlawful carrying of a handgun if committed by an adult. Finds the Marion Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in the admission of evidence.
Reanna Stearns v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-1221
Criminal. Affirms Reanna Stearns’ four-year sentence for Level 5 felony operating a motor vehicle after forfeiture of license for life and Class A misdemeanor false-identity statement. Finds Stearns’ sentence is not inappropriate.
Sheirdan Lamont Sisk v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-1834
Criminal. Affirms Sheirdan Sisk’s convictions of unlawful carrying of a handgun and resisting law enforcement. Finds the Hamilton Superior Court did not err in the admission of evidence. Also finds the evidence was sufficient.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.