« Ind. Courts - Update on suit to to lift the rules that bar Indiana judicial candidates from commenting on issues | Main | Ind. Courts - Clark County scuttles plan for 2 more judges »

Wednesday, July 12, 2006

Ind. Courts - Court of Appeals posts three today

In Mark M. Ransley v. State of Indiana, a 16-page opinion (with a dissent beginnig on p. 11), CJ Kirsch writes:

Mark M. Ransley (“Ransley”) appeals his conviction for intimidation1 as a Class C felony following a jury trial. On appeal, he raises two issues, of which we find the following dispositive: whether the State presented sufficient evidence that Ransley acted with the intent of placing Nolan in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act as required under the intimidation statute. We reverse. * * *

SULLIVAN, J., concurs.
DARDEN, J., dissents with separate opinion. [which begins]

I would respectfully dissent, finding that sufficient probative evidence exists to support the jury’s verdict that Ransley committed the offense of intimidation, a class C felony. * * * [and concludes]

Accordingly, I would find that sufficient evidence of probative value exists which supports the jury’s verdict that Ransley committed the offense of intimidation, as a class C felony. Thus, I vote to affirm the trial court.

John Redden v. State of Indiana - affirms convictions and sentence for various drug-related offenses.

In Valerie L. Hamilton v. Steven D. Ashton, D.O., Ashton Cosmetice Surgery & Kosciusko Community Hospital, Judge Robb writes:

In Hamilton v. Ashton, 846 N.E.2d 309 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) [ILB entry here, from4/27/06], we held, in part, that the trial court did not err in granting partial summary judgment to Dr. Ashton on the issue of his negligence in the performance of surgery on Valerie Hamilton. Hamilton now petitions for rehearing.1 We grant the petition in order to clarify our holding, but reaffirm our opinion in all respects.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 12, 2006 11:12 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions