Court opinions

Indiana Supreme Court

James Combs v. State of Indiana
20S-CR-616
Criminal. Affirms the trial court’s judgment that denied James Combs’ motion to suppress after concluding that that police officers had probable cause to believe his van was connected to criminal activity and therefore could be seized without a warrant. Finds that the seizure and search of Combs’ van fell under recognized exceptions to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. Justice Rush and Justice David concur. Justice Slaughter concurs in result. Justice Goff dissents.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Edward Koziski v. State of Indiana
20A-CR-1889
Criminal. Affirms and reverses in part Edward Koziski’s convictions of two counts of Level 1 felony child molesting and one count each of Level 5 felony criminal confinement and Level 5 felony kidnapping. Finds the test in Wadle v. State, 151 N.E.3d 227 (Ind. 2020) applies. Also finds that under Wadle, Koziski’s Level 1 felony convictions do not violate double jeopardy. Finally, finds Koziski’s Level 5 felony convictions do violate double jeopardy under Wadle, because confinement is an included offense of kidnapping. Remands with instructions to vacate Koziski’s conviction and sentence for Level 5 felony criminal confinement.

Indiana Court of Appeals
In Re: the Adoption of K.T.; J.J. and C.T. v. G.C. and C.B.
20A-AD-2102
Adoption. Affirms the order finding that mother C.T. and father J.J.’s consent to the adoption of their minor child, K.T., was not necessary. Finds the Fulton Circuit Court did not err as a matter of law when it considered whether C.T. and J.J.’s consents to the adoption were required despite an ongoing CHINS proceeding with K.T. Also finds the record supports the trial court’s findings that J.J.’s consent to the adoption is not required, and the court’s findings support its judgment dispensing with J.J.’s consent.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Sandra A. King and Danielle D. Benge v. Dan Dejanovic and Alice Dejanovic
20A-PL-2366
Civil plenary. Affirms the order for Sandra A. King and Danielle D. Benge to remove or reduce the size of their pole barn within 90 days. Finds that even though there are other violations of the covenants in the subdivision, they are on the “other” side of the subdivision and “not practically within sigh” of the property owned by Dan and Alice Dejanovic. Also finds the Dejanovics’ failure to object to the other violations does not deprive them of the right to enforce the covenant for a violation right next door that directly interferes with the use and enjoyment of their property.

The following 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion was posted after IL deadline Wednesday:
David Jones v. Rodney Cummings, et al.
20-1898
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Senior Judge Sarah Evans Barker. Civil. Affirms the dismissal of David Jones’ complaint alleging Madison County prosecutors maliciously prosecuted him in violation of his due process rights. Finds that longstanding principles of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and prosecutorial immunity block him at the threshold.

Richard Jefferson Deibel v. Larry Hoeg, Aaron Hoeg, and Roger Steffen
20-3378
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. Chief Judge Tanya Walton Pratt. Civil. Affirms the dismissal of Richard Jefferson Deibel’s suit contending his settlement with Larry Hoeg and Roger Steffen allowed him to retain his shares in his former company Hy-Pro Corp. Finds Deibel’s suit was untimely and is not saved by a continuing wrong.

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Jay R. Thompson v. Frank Vanihel
20-2571
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Terre Haute Division. Judge James R. Sweeney II.

Civil. Affirms the dismissal of Jay Thompson’s petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Finds counsel’s alleged legal errors did not prejudice Thompson.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Jeromy D. Hurd v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
20A-CR-1671
Criminal. Reverses Jeromy D. Hurd’s conviction for theft but affirms his convictions for dealing in methamphetamine and dealing in marijuana. Finds the state provided insufficient evidence to support Hurd’s conviction of theft but provided sufficient evidence that Hurd possessed meth and marijuana. Also finds that any error in the admission of messages received by Hurd’s phone was harmless. Remands.

Indiana Court of Appeals
James L. Mosley v. State of Indiana
20A-CR-02094
Criminal. Reverses the Ripley Circuit Court’s revocation of three years of James L. Mosley’s probation for his conviction of fraud, as well as its order that he spend those years in prison. Finds a no-contact order cannot be issued to protect a dead person and that Mosley’s probation cannot be revoked based on violation of that void order.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Paul M. Robey v. State of Indiana
20A-CR-2187
Criminal. Affirms Paul M. Robey’s conviction of Class 4 felony child molesting. Finds the video of the victim’s forensic interview was merely cumulative of B.B.’s testimony, so any error in publishing it was harmless.

Indiana Court of Appeals
Donnie Louis Sawyer v. State of Indiana
20A-CR-1446
Criminal. Reverses the order denying Donnie Louis Sawyer’s petition for depositions of two minors alleged to be victims of child molesting by Sawyer. Finds Indiana Code § 35-40-5-11.5 conflicts with the Indiana Trial Rules 26 and 30, so the provisions of the Trial Rules govern.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Shawn Lacey v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
20A-CR-1689
Criminal. Affirms Shawn Lacey’s conviction of Level 5 felony battery. Finds the evidence is sufficient.

Express Scripts Incorporated v. Department of State Revenue
19T-TA-18
Tax. Denies the Indiana Department of State Revenue’s motion for partial summary judgment and grants summary judgment to Express Scripts on the issue of whether Express Scripts receives its Indiana income from the retail sale of prescription drugs or from the provision of services. Finds Express Scripts receives its Indiana income from the latter. Remands the matter to the department for action consistent with the opinion.