The Indiana Law Blog: Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 13 NFP)

« Ind. Courts - Still more on "Marion Superior Court judges plan to start cracking down on prospective jurors who don't show up on the days they're assigned" | Main | Ind. Decisions - More today on the voter ID case »

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 13 NFP)

For publication opinions today (3):

In Bacompt Systems v. Angelina Peck and David C. Peck , an 11-page opinion, Judge Bradford writes:

Appellant-Defendant, Bacompt Systems, Inc., appeals the trial court’s judgment granting the petition of Appellees-Plaintiffs, Angelina Peck and David Peck, to inspect Bacompt’s corporate records. Bacompt argues on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in granting the Pecks’s petition because the Pecks failed to establish that their demand to inspect Bacompt’s records complied with Indiana Code section 23-1-52-2 (2006). We reverse and remand.

In Richard P. Wallace v. State of Indiana , a 12-page opinion, Chief Judge Baker writes:

Appellant-defendant Richard P. Wallace appeals his conviction for Failing to Register as a Sex Offender,1 a class D felony. Specifically, Wallace argues that the requirement for him to register is an ex post facto law and the State forfeited its right to prosecute him in light of a previous plea agreement that had been negotiated. Finally, Wallace contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. * * *

Here, although the State was required to prove Wallace’s failure to register, we cannot conclude that it was obligated to demonstrate the precise moment in which the failure took place. Moreover, the statute required Wallace to complete a registration form following his release from probation. Of course, Wallace had completed his term of probation long before the registration requirement was made applicable to him in 2001. However, Wallace was in violation of his duty to register—including the requirement that he complete a registration form—from the date that the duty to register was imposed, July 1, 2001, until the date that he was charged with failing to register. And the State presented sufficient evidence that Wallace never fulfilled this duty. Therefore, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to sustain Wallace’s conviction. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

In Kevin Kuypers v. State of Indiana , a 7-page opinion, Chief Judge Baker writes:

Appellant-defendant Kevin Kuypers appeals his conviction for Child Solicitation,1 a class C felony. Kuypers argues that evidence that he engaged in an online chat with a believed-to-be fifteen-year-old girl, in which he neither specifically asked her to do anything nor made specific arrangements to meet in person, is insufficient to support the conviction. Finding the evidence sufficient, we affirm. * * *

Here, it may reasonably be inferred from the evidence that Kuypers requested and advised Samantha to meet with him and engage in, among other things, sexual intercourse. The absence of details does not make him any less guilty. We find, therefore, that the State presented sufficient evidence to support Kuypers’s conviction for child solicitation. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

NFP civil opinions today (2):

Kenneth J. Hendrickson, d/b/a Family Farm Seeds v. Kerkhoff Seed Farm (NFP) - "Appellants-Defendants Kenneth J. Hendrickson (“Hendrickson”) and Family Farm Seeds, Inc. (“Family Farm Seeds”) (collectively, “the Defendants”) appeal the trial court’s entry of judgment against them on Kerkhoff Seed Farm, Inc.’s (“Kerkhoff”) claim for collection of a debt and the trial court’s entry of judgment against them on their breach of contract counterclaim. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand."

Kimball International Inc., et al v. Environetics, Inc., et al (NFP) - "Appellant-defendant Kimball International, Inc., d/b/a National Office Furniture (Kimball), appeals the trial court’s order dismissing its complaint against appellee-defendant Monteiro Development, Inc. (MDI), for lack of personal jurisdiction. Kimball argues that the trial court had personal jurisdiction over MDI pursuant to a forum selection clause contained in a contract signed by MDI. Alternatively, Kimball contends that the trial court should have permitted the parties to engage in discovery before ruling on the personal jurisdiction issue. Finding that MDI is bound by the forum selection clause and that the trial court may exercise personal jurisdiction over MDI, we reverse and remand for further proceedings."

NFP criminal opinions today 11):

State of Indiana v. Christopher Simcoe (NFP)

James L. Holliday v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jared J. Bailey v. State of Indiana (NFP)

John T. Vance v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Kevin Turner v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Justin N. Tracy v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Antwon Armstrong v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Charlie Herbst v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Joshua E. Gale v. State of Indiana (NFP)

William Mishler v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Manuel G. Ayon v. State of Indiana (NFP)