Court rules on appellate counsel issue in child molesting case
A decade-old old case from the Indiana Court of Appeals doesn’t apply to child molesting cases, the state’s second
highest appellate court has ruled.
To refine your search through our archives use our Advanced Search
A decade-old old case from the Indiana Court of Appeals doesn’t apply to child molesting cases, the state’s second
highest appellate court has ruled.
The Indiana Supreme Court issued a pair of short per curiam opinions on Thursday afternoon that adopt what the Indiana Court
of Appeals decided on two criminal appeals.
Indiana Supreme Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Donald
Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
10A04-1001-PC-12
Post conviction. Affirms denial of petition for post-conviction relief.
Androuckoo
Jones v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0911-CR-1108
Criminal. Affirms convictions of two Class A misdemeanors, one for domestic battery, and one for resisting law enforcement.
Term.
of Parent-Child Rel. of G.W.; J.W. v. IDCS (NFP)
48A02-0910-JV-1042
Juvenile. Affirms involuntary termination of parental rights.
Carleon
M. Ragsdale v. State of Indiana (NFP)
02A03-0912-CR-595
Criminal. Affirms sentence following guilty plea to Class D felonies criminal recklessness and resisting law enforcement,
and Class A misdemeanor possession of a firearm by a domestic batterer.
James
Walsh v. State of Indiana (NFP)
52A05-0911-CR-667
Criminal. Reverses sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony burglary and admission to being a habitual offender.
Remands with instructions.
R.D.
v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0909-JV-840
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for committing what would be Class D felony criminal recklessness if committed by an adult.
Anthony
H. Taylor v. State of Indiana (NFP)
71A03-0912-CR-602
Criminal. Reverses adjudication as a habitual offender.
Terrence
Hopson v. State of Indiana (NFP)
29A02-0912-CR-1239
Criminal. Affirms conviction of Class B felony burglary.
Virgil
J. Smith v. State of Indiana (NFP)
85A02-1001-CR-176
Criminal. Revises sentence following guilty plea to Class B felony robbery and remands for the trial court to order concurrent
sentences for the robbery conviction and an unrelated case.
Robertson
Developers v. Jerry Hodges, et al. (NFP)
18A02-0910-CV-1051
Civil. Affirms judgment in favor of defendants Hodges and others upon a claim for payment of lease. Remands for determination
of reasonable attorney fees.
K.
K. B. v. R. K. B. (NFP)
26A05-0910-CV-595
Civil. Affirms evidence supports all but one of the findings in the order entry awarding physical custody of children to
father. Reverses finding that Mother did not adequately investigate S.B.’s allegation of sexual abuse is not supported
by the evidence. Remands for the dissolution court to reconsider the remaining findings and the other evidence from the hearing
on final custody in order to determine what physical custody order is in the children’s best interests, or, if no change
to the custody award is indicated, to so state.
Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of J.K., et al.; S.K. v. IDCS (NFP)
71A03-1002-JT-94
Juvenile. Affirms termination of parental rights.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Douglas
Covey v. State of Indiana
30A01-0906-CR-311
Criminal. Affirms convictions of dealing in methamphetamine as a Class A felony, possession of methamphetamine as a Class
B felony, possession of methamphetamine as a Class B felony, possession of marijuana as a Class A misdemeanor, and possession
of paraphernalia a Class A misdemeanor. The state presented sufficient evidence to prove that Crosby lived in an “apartment
complex” and thus Covey delivered the methamphetamine and possessed the methamphetamine in or within 1,000 feet of a
“family housing complex.” Because Covey never placed the mitigating factors of Indiana Code Section 35-48-4-16(b)
at issue, the trial court did not commit fundamental error by not instructing the jury on those mitigating factors.
A Terre Haute attorney has lost a free speech case before the Supreme Court of the United States, striking a blow to what
he calls an ongoing campaign to eliminate campaign finance reform.
The state presented sufficient evidence to prove a defendant delivered and possessed methamphetamine within 1,000 feet of
a family housing complex, so the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed elevating his convictions to a higher felony level.
Two law enforcers and a nongovernmental organization official from the Philippines will visit Indiana University School of
Law – Indianapolis Friday to discuss global human trafficking.
Indiana Court of Appeals
Mary Ann Dandino v. Luisito C. Gonzales, M.D., and Elkhart Clinic, LLC (NFP)
20A03-0907-CV-354
Civil. Affirms grant of Dandino’s motion to correct error and grant of a new trial based on the omission of the definition
of proximate cause in the jury instructions. Reverses denial of her motion to amend her complaint pursuant to Ind. Trial Rule
15(B). Remands for further proceedings.
I.S. v. State of Indiana (NFP)
49A02-0909-JV-861
Juvenile. Affirms adjudication for committing what would be Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana if committed by an
adult.
Indiana Tax Court had posted no opinions at IL deadline.
Indiana Supreme Court
Indiana
Patient's Compensation Fund v. Gary Patrick
49S02-0909-CV-402
Civil. Reverses finding that the Adult Wrongful Death Statute applied to Patrick’s claim as personal representative
of his son’s estate and award to Patrick for his emotional distress claim. Because damages for emotional distress aren’t
available under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute, a parent can’t bring a derivative claim seeking such damages under
the Medical Malpractice Act.
Because claims for emotional distress aren’t allowed under the Adult Wrongful Death Statute, a father can’t bring
this type of derivative claim under the Medical Malpractice Act, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled today.
A trial court didn’t abuse its discretion when it admitted transcripts translated into English of drug transactions
recorded in Spanish because the jury wouldn’t be able to understand the recording, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled.
The Indiana Supreme Court has dismissed a transfer petition filed by the Indiana Department of Child Services because the
Indiana Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the DCS.
The Indiana Supreme Court has reappointed a Disciplinary Commission member to a second, five-year term.
There are a lot of people who want to become attorneys. So many people, in fact, that the Indiana Board of Law Examiners has
had to find a second location to administer the July test.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted a stay imposed by the District Court in Hammond on an insurer’s declaratory
judgment action regarding coverage of a physician who skipped town instead of facing criminal charges and civil suits.
In its first case since the state amended its rules last year on how judicial mandates are handled, the Indiana Supreme Court
has today issued a decision about a St. Joseph Superior judge’s mandate for the county to pay for multiple items he
considered necessary for running the local juvenile justice system.
Ruling on an issue of first impression, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals today extended the logic of an eight-year-old case
to how criminal defendants challenge their supervised release and revocation penalties and what must be discussed in attorney
withdraw briefs on those issues.
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Medical
Assurance Co., Inc. v. Amy Hellman, et al.
08-2887
U. S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana, Hammond Division, Judge Allen Sharp.
Civil. Medical Assurance appealed the District Court’s stay on the company’s declaratory judgment action. The
company asked the court to declare that Dr. Mark Weinberger breached his contract obligations when he disappeared while on
vacation and hasn’t been participating in his defense in more than 350 medical malpractice claims.
Although state law allows police to request identification from passengers inside a car that they’ve stopped, two Indianapolis
officers shouldn’t have done arrested a man for refusing to identify himself when there was no reasonable suspicion
he’d done anything wrong.