« Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides one today | Main | Ind. Gov't. - "State Ethics Commission: Scott Storms Violated Code Of Ethics Former IURC, Duke Employee Fined" »

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 today (and 6 NFP)

For publication opinions today (3):

In Commissioner of Labor on the Relation of Vincent and Antimo Scialdone v. An Island, LLC, a 7-page opinion, Judge Bailey writes:

The Commissioner of Labor, on the relation of Vincent and Antimo Scialdone (collectively, the “Scialdones”), filed suit under the Wage Claims Act, Ind. Code § 22-2-9-1 et seq., in Marion County for unpaid wages allegedly due the Scialdones from their prior employer, An Island, LLC (“Island”). The trial court granted Island’s Motion to Dismiss for improper venue and ordered the case transferred to Perry County. The Scialdones now appeal, raising only one issue: whether the trial court abused its discretion when it determined that Perry County was the only preferred venue for the case and granted Island’s Motion to Dismiss. We affirm. * * *

Here, the Scialdones pursued their action after having had their claim designated to a private attorney by the Attorney General, rather than the Attorney General or a county prosecuting attorney pursuing the claim on behalf of the Scialdones. The Scialdones apparently do not live in Marion County, and Island is located in Perry County. Absent facts tending to establish Marion County as a preferred venue for this case, Perry County is the only preferred venue for this case under Trial Rule 75(A)(1), and thus the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered the Scialdones’ case dismissed from Marion County and transferred to Perry County.

In Lloyd Conn v. State of Indiana , an 11-page opinion, Judge Brown writes:
Lloyd Conn appeals his conviction for conspiracy to commit murder as a class A felony. Lloyd raises one issue which we revise and restate as whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction. We affirm. * * *

Any one of the three overt acts presented by the State was enough to prove that a conspiracy to murder Stacy existed. Accordingly, we conclude that evidence of probative value was presented at trial from which a jury could find that Lloyd entered into an agreement with Bill and/or Barbara to murder Stacy and that overt acts were taken to further that conspiracy. Minniefield, 512 N.E.2d at 1105-1106 (holding that the evidence was sufficient of an agreement and that an overt act was taken to sustain the defendant‟s conviction for conspiracy to commit murder).

In Erodney Davis v. State of Indiana , a 10-page opinion, Judge Baker writes:
In this case, one of the issues with which we are presented is whether a trial court abused its discretion when it allowed a police detective to testify as a skilled witness that the denominations of money found on the defendant were indicative of drug dealing. While skilled witnesses need not satisfy the onerous requirements for expert witnesses under Indiana Evidence Rule 702, they must satisfy the two requirements under Indiana Evidence Rule 701, namely, that their testimony be rationally based on their perception and helpful to a clear understanding of their testimony or a fact in issue. The trial court concluded that the police detective‟s testimony satisfied both requirements. We cannot agree, but the error was harmless.

Appellant-defendant Erodney Davis appeals his conviction for Possession of Cocaine, a class C felony. Specifically, Davis argues that the trial court erred by permitting a police detective to testify as a skilled witness and by excluding evidence of a witness‟s prior drug-related convictions. Additionally, Davis contends that the trial court erred by giving an additional instruction to the jury that it had inadvertently omitted from the final jury instructions. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

NFP civil opinions today (1):

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of R.A., et al.; A.L. & R.A. v. I.D.C.S. (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (5):

Jameson Malbrough v. State of Indiana (NFP)

James Spann v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Rodney Griffin v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Robert A. Jordan v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Thomas Huffine v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 12, 2011 10:35 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions