« Ind. Law - Fighting foreclosures and mortgage fraud [Updated] | Main | Courts - 7th Circuit Rules on FMLA Leave With Disability Benefits »

Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 7NFP) [Links corrected]

For publication opinions today (1):

In Antonio Agilera v. State of Indiana , a 16-page opinion, Judge Riley writes:

Appellant-Defendant, Antonio Agilera (Agilera), appeals his conviction for child molesting, a Class C felony, Ind. Code § 35-42-4-3. We affirm.

Agilera raises three issues on appeal, which we restate as follows: (1) Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting statements by child victim, K.E.; (2) Whether the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain Agilera’s conviction for child molesting; and (3) Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Agilera’s Motion for Mistrial. * * *

[W]e find Agilera’s Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause rights were not violated and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting K.E.’s statements to her mother, grandmother, Detective Buttram, and the forensic investigator. * * *

Whether to grant or deny a motion for mistrial is a decision left to the sound discretion of the trial court. Alvies v. State, 795 N.E.2d 493, 506 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003), trans. denied. We will reverse the trial court’s ruling only upon an abuse of that discretion. * * *

We have recognized that a mistrial is an extreme sanction warranted only when no other cure can be expected to rectify the situation. Id. Reversible error is seldom found when the trial court has admonished the jury to disregard a statement made during the proceedings because a timely and accurate admonition to the jury is presumed to sufficiently protect a defendant’s rights and remove any error created by the objectionable statement. Id. [ILB - emphasis in the original]. * * *

Based on the foregoing, we conclude (1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting K.E.’s out-of-court statements; (2) the State presented sufficient evidence to sustain Agilera’s conviction for child molesting; and (3) the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Agilera’s Motion for Mistrial.

NFP civil opinions today (1):

Kevin Brown v. Danielle M. (Brown) Pitzer-Brandon (NFP) - Appeal of an order modifying parental time and child support; affirmed

NFP criminal opinions today (6):

Jacob Malone v. State of Indiana (NFP) - See this detailed March 9, 2007 Wabash Plain Dealer story, headed "Indiana Court of Appeals overturns conviction in Manchester murder trial," detailing the result of "the failure to allow alibi testimony."

Daniel Jean-Julian v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert McFarland v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Raymond Thompson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Scully Noland v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Marie Yanez v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 7, 2007 12:10 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions