Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Ind. Decisions - Still more on: Supreme Court reverses guilty but mentally ill decision
Updating this ILB entry from Dec. 22, 2010, and this followup from Dec. 26, 2010, today Sophia Voravong of the Lafayette Journal Courier has this story, headlined "Lafayette family in fear after murder conviction is overturned." The story concludes:
Henry County Prosecutor Kit Crane plans to ask Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller to petition the Supreme Court to reconsider its ruling.Some ILB comments:
Part of that request would be based on new Justice Steven David, who supported overturning Galloway's conviction but was not on the high court when oral arguments were heard.
Gray said she also received a letter from Crane about what could happen next.
If the Supreme Court decision stands, Crane plans to file a petition to have Galloway committed to a state mental hospital for an "indeterminate" amount of time.
First, the Dec. 26th ILB entry pointed to footnote 9, on pp. 9-10 of the opinion, which discusses the commitment process.
Second, re the prosecutor's complaint that Justice David "supported overturning Galloway's conviction but was not on the high court when oral arguments were heard," the consensus the ILB has heard is "good luck with that . . ."
It is up to the Court whether or not even to schedule oral argument in a transfer case. Moreover, the videocast of the oral argument in the Galloway case was available to Justice David, as were all the filings in the case.
Justice David has written the majority opinion in two cases so far. In Andres Sanchez v. State of Indiana, filed Dec. 22nd, there was no oral argument.
In Anthony D. Delarosa v. State of Indiana, a direct appeal and the first opinion from Justice David, filed Dec. 21st, the oral argument was held on May 13, 2010, long before Justice David took the bench.
On Sept. 13th, only four justices heard oral arguments in the case of Cassie Pfenning v. Joseph Lineman. The argument was held in Bloomington, at the Maurer School of Law. At the time, the ILB asked about Justice Boehm's absence, and received this response:
Unfortunately Justice Boehm was ill today. Chief Justice Shepard told the students he plans on participating in this case, but could not attend oral argument.As it turns out, no decision has yet been issued in the case. If it had been issued while Justice Boehm was still on the bench, under the prosecutor's reasoning, J. Boehm would have been required to abstain.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 28, 2010 10:29 AM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions