Opinions July 26, 2023

  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Mallory Stout v. Tanner Knotts
22A-PL-1216
Civil plenary. Reverses the Putnam Circuit Court’s denial of Mallory Stout’s motion to correct error. Finds the trial court erroneously denied Stout’s motion to correct error and failed to recuse. Remands for further proceedings, including the assignment of a new judge.

Philip D. Hutson, Jr. v. State of Indiana
22A-CR-2240
Criminal. Affirms the Marion Superior Court’s denial of Philip D. Hutson Jr.’s motion to suppress evidence found during a traffic stop. Finds State Trooper Scott Probasco did not violate Hutson’s rights under the Fourth Amendment or Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution when he stopped Hutson for committing a traffic infraction or when he seized a gun in plain view before placing Hutson in his police vehicle.

Judy Caroline Moore v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-3027
Criminal. Affirms Judy Caroline Moore’s convictions of Level 2 felony voluntary manslaughter and Level 6 felony obstruction of justice for killing her stepmother. Finds that the Jasper Superior Court did not abuse its discretion by omitting certain evidence. Also finds the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction.

Martel Winston v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-163
Criminal. Affirms Martel Winston’s conviction for Class A misdemeanor battery resulting in bodily injury. Finds the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.

Dijoun Sims v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-391
Criminal. Affirms Dijoun Sims’ conviction for criminal mischief as a Class B misdemeanor. Finds the evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction.

Billie J. Minix v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-191
Criminal. Affirms Billie Minix’s conviction for Level 3 felony aggravated battery, Level 3 felony criminal confinement and Level 5 felony intimidation. Finds Minix waived his challenge to the admission of evidence by affirmatively stating that he had no objection to the admission of the evidence when it was introduced at trial.

Jody Eugene Elkins v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
23A-CR-290
Criminal. Affirms Jody Eugene Elkins’ conviction for criminal confinement as a level 3 felony. Finds the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction.

Leon Chew, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-2193
Criminal. Affirms Leon Chew Jr.’s murder conviction and adjudication as a habitual offender. Finds there was no instructional error. Also finds sufficient evidence supports Chew’s habitual offender adjudication. Finally, finds Chew’s sentence is not inappropriate.

Mark Allen Lehman v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
22A-CR-1047
Criminal. Affirms Mark Lehman’s conviction for Level 6 domestic battery. Finds the Vanderburgh Circuit Court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Lehman’s motion for a mistrial or when it refused to give his proposed jury instruction.

Dustardie D. Reed v. Brian L. Reed (mem. dec.)
22A-DR-2940
Domestic relations. Affirms the Cass Superior Court’s dissolution decree dissolving Dustardie Reed’s marriage to Brian Reed. Finds the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it chose to credit Brian and Donald Zehner over Dustardie and Michael Strauch. Also finds the court did not clearly err when it omitted several items from the marital pot.

Charlene A. Wimsett, Individually, and Charlene A. Wimsett and Martin D. Wimsett, as Co-Trustees of the Martin D. Wimsett Family Trust v. Zeik’s Run, LLC (mem. dec.)
22A-MI-1565
Miscellaneous. Affirms the Vermillion Circuit Court’s judgment in favor of Zeik’s Run LLC. Finds the trial court did not err.

Dwayne A. Springfield v. State of Indiana (mem dec.)
22A-PC-1724
Post-conviction relief. Grants rehearing to correct factual errors and affirms the original opinion in all other respects. Finds that despite the misstatements of facts, overwhelming evidence of Dwayne Springfield’s guilt remained, and Springfield did not demonstrate a reasonable probability that the result of trial would have been different if his trial counsel had asked for severance of his trial.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}