Court opinions

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Adam B. Kenny v. State of Indiana
22A-CR-2082
Criminal. Affirms Adam Kenny’s convictions of Level 2 felony dealing in methamphetamine, Level 6 felony unlawful possession of a syringe, Class C misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia, Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license and three counts of Class A misdemeanor unlawful possession of a firearm by a dangerous person. Finds the Tippecanoe Superior Court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence resulting from a valid traffic stop consistent with the Fourth Amendment.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
MEGA OIL, INC., an Illinois Corporation, et al. v. CITATION 2004 INVESTMENT, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company
22A-MI-1275
Miscellaneous. Affirms the Gibson Circuit Court’s grant of partial summary judgment to Citation 2004 Investment LLC. Finds the trial court did not clearly err.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Kristopher M. Wainscott v. State of Indiana
22A-CR-1817
Criminal. Affirms the denial of Kristopher Wainscott’s motion to suppress all evidence derived from the search warrant for his phone. Finds the warrant had already been executed by the seizure of the phone when the alleged victim partially recanted her allegations against Wainscott, so the state had no obligation to inform the magistrate judge of the partial recantation.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: J.G. v. Community Health Network, Inc.
22A-MH-2533
Mental health. Dismisses J.G.’s appeal as moot. Finds her temporary commitment has expired and she has failed to show an applicable exception to the mootness doctrine. Also finds J.G. has failed to show that this is a “close case” such that the mootness doctrine should not be applied.

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Malcolm Dwight Smith II v. State of Indiana
21A-CR-1514
Criminal. Affirms Malcolm Dwight Smith II’s conviction for Level 4 felony burglary. Finds the LaPorte Superior Court did not violate Smith’s right to a speedy trial under Indiana Criminal Rule 4(B). Also finds Smith has waived his argument that the trial court abused its discretion in the admission of evidence. Finally, finds there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.