Monday, April 30, 2012
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 5 today (and 9 NFP)
For publication opinions today (5):
In Daniel P. Millikan v. Lori A. Eifrid , a 21-page opinion, Judge Baker begins:
In this case, the trial court properly determined that the plaintiff was the bona fide and innocent purchaser for value of a parcel of property when applying the doctrine of equitable subrogation. Thus, title to the property awarded to the plaintiff is superior to any right, title, or interest that might be claimed by the defendant or his successors in interest. However, because the trial court determined that the defendant had not committed fraud that might otherwise have entitled the plaintiff to recover her attorney fees, we reverse that portion of the judgment and vacate the award of attorney fees.Walter B. Duncan v. The Greater Brownsburg Chamber of Commerce, Inc.
In Jason Jeffries v. State of Indiana , a 14-page opinion, Judge Baker begins:
Today we decide whether the trial court should have permitted a defendant to withdraw his guilty plea when his trial counsel failed to discover that the State could not have charged him with being a habitual offender in only one of the two separate causes that were filed against him. Because the defendant could have been tried on one of the habitual offender counts potentially resulting in a longer sentence than he received under the plea agreement and both habitual counts were dismissed pursuant to the plea agreement, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion to withdraw the guilty plea.NFP civil opinions today (2):
NFP criminal opinions today (7):
InState of Indiana v. Blake Lodde (NFP), a 6-page opinion, Chief Judge Robb writes:
The State appeals the trial court order granting Blake Lodde’s motion to suppress evidence gathered during and after an investigatory stop of Lodde’s vehicle. The sole issue is whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop. Concluding that the trial court erred in applying the wrong standard in ruling on the motion to suppress, we reverse and remand. * * *Jasper A. Wisdom v. State of Indiana (NFP)
We conclude that the record indicates the trial court erroneously applied the probable cause standard in ruling on Lodde’s motion. Although the trial court verbally referred to reasonable suspicion once at the close of the suppression hearing, the trial court also verbally referred to probable cause, and in its order it stated that Deputy Lendermon did not have probable cause. The trial court’s analysis in its denial of the State’s motion to correct errors also relies on a case which concerned probable cause. Despite Lodde’s appellate contention, we do not believe this to be a scrivener’s error. Because the trial court applied the wrong standard, we reverse its order granting Lodde’s motion to suppress and remand with instructions for the trial court to apply the reasonable suspicion standard to the facts of this case.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on April 30, 2012 01:35 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions