« Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals posts three today | Main | Law - U.S. Supreme Court Votes to Allow Citation to Unpublished Opinions in Federal Courts »

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Ind. Courts - Supreme Court to hear case in Richmond

Via a release from the Supreme Court:

The Indiana Supreme Court will hold oral argument at Indiana University-East, in Richmond, Ind. at 2 p.m. on Monday, April 17, 2005, Chief Justice Randall T. Shepard announced today.

The case is Norman Thompson v. State of Indiana. In this case, the State charged Mr. Thompson with carrying a handgun without a license. Mr. Thompson argued that the evidence of the handgun should be kept out of court and the Marion Superior Court judge agreed. However, the Indiana Court of Appeals overturned the trial judge's decision. Now, Mr. Thompson has asked the Indiana Supreme Court to review the case and reinstate the trial judge's original decision. The attorney for Mr. Thompson is Stephen Gerald Gray. Cynthia Ploughe will represent the State of Indiana.

“The Supreme Court was very grateful that Wayne Superior Judge Tom Snow invited us to come to Richmond. My colleagues and I feel it is important for Hoosiers to get a first hand look at how our courts work,” said Chief Justice Shepard.

The argument will take place in the Vivian Auditorium in Whitewater Hall, 2325 Chester Boulevard in Richmond and last about an hour and each side will have twenty minutes to argue its sides of the case.

The public and the news media are invited to attend. The case will also be webcast live over the Internet. To view it, go [here].

(That must mean they are taking along the Supreme Court camera.)

BTW, the Court of Appeals opinion is not available online because it was a Not-for-Publication decision. The NFP list for 12/2/05 shows that on 11/29/05 the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the decision of the trial court, in an opinion by Judge Friedlander, with Judge Sullivan dissenting. However, this opinion was designated as "not for publication" under Appellate Rule 65(D) on the basis that it did not meet the criteria of 65(A):

(1) establishes, modifies, or clarifies a rule of law;

(2) criticizes existing law; or

(3) involves a legal or factual issue of unique interest or substantial public importance.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 12, 2006 05:23 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions