« Vacancy on COA 2012 - More on: The ILB is anticipating the release of the Judicial Nominating Commission's report to the Governor | Main | Environment - AG Zoeller concerned about Asian Carp in Indiana rivers, such as lower Wabash. »
Monday, June 11, 2012
Ind. Decisions - Transfer list for week ending June 8, 2012 [Updated]
[Search all the Transfer Lists: The ILB feature, "Search the ILB Transfer Lists," allows you to do just that, back to Feb. 2004. Check it out. Read the instructions. Note that the search is now current through the Feb. 24, 2012 list.]
Here is the Clerk's transfer list for the week ending Friday, June 8, 2012. It is four pages (and 39 cases) long.
Seven transfers were granted last week:
- Andre Gonzalez v. State of Indiana - From the March 16th COA NFP opinion:
Andre Gonzalez appeals the denial of his petition to remove his sex offender designation pursuant to Ind. Code § 11-8-8-22. We reverse and remand. * * * [T]he seventh factor of the intent-effects test indicates Ind. Code § 11-8-8-19(c) is an unconstitutional ex post facto law as applied to Gonzalez because the imposition of the requirement without recourse tips the test toward the change in law being punitive.
- Felix C. Sickels v. State of Indiana - This was a 30-page Jan. 6th COA opinion which included on p. 28:
Sickels next argues that the trial court improperly ordered him to pay restitution. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court stated that “restitution” in the amount of “$86,420” is to be made to “Ms. Sickels, the victim in the case.” Transcript at 87. But in its written sentencing order, the court states: “Arrearage in the amount of $84,420.00 as of 2/8/11 reduced to judgment in favor of Kathy L. Sickles [sic], civil cause number 20D03-9107-DR205.” Appellant’s App. at 118 (emphasis original). These two statements are unclear in three respects and require a remand for clarification.
- Roger L. Bushorn v. State of Indiana - This was a Feb. 16th NFP COA opinion where the panel ruled at p. 10:
After due consideration and under the circumstances, we conclude that Bushhorn has met his burden of establishing that his forty-seven year sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character. Pursuant to Appellate Rule 7(B), we exercise our authority to revise Bushhorn’s sentence for his conviction under Count II to thirty-five years executed in the Department of Correction, to run concurrently with the six-year sentences imposed by the trial court under Counts IV, VI, and VII, for an aggregate sentence of thirty-five years, and we remand with instructions to resentence Bushhorn accordingly.
- Curtis A. Bethea v. State of Indiana - This is a March 20th, 35-page, 2-1, three-opinion decision, with the court denying post-conviction relief.
- Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Insurance v. Tim Black, as Husband and Personal Representative of Kay Black, Deceased - A Feb. 10th COA opinion concluding: "Based on the foregoing, we hold that a genuine issue of material fact exists whether Black has satisfied the condition precedent for access to the PCF pursuant to I.C. § 34-18-15-3. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings."
- Todd J. Crider v. State of Indiana - A March 29th 2-1 COA decision:
Did the trial court erroneously order the sentence in the instant cause, which includes an enhancement for a habitual offender finding, be served consecutively to the sentence imposed in a separate cause in a different county that also included a habitual offender enhancement? We dismiss. * * * Crider “knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive[d] his right to challenge the sentence on the basis that it is erroneous.”
- Margaret Kosarko v. William A. Padula, Administrator of the Estate of Daniel L. Herndobler, Deceased - A Dec. 30, 2011 2-1 opinion where the issue is prejudgment interest.
- Lawrence Ray Holley, II v. State of Indiana - The Court grants Transfer of jurisdiction, vacates the not-for-publication decision of the Court of Appeals, and remands the case to the Court of Appeals to address the merits. This is a Dec. 14, 2011 COA opinion on rehearing, with an appellant pro se, that began:
Lawrence Ray Holley II, pro se, petitions for rehearing following our memorandum decision affirming the post-conviction court’s denial of Holley’s petition for post-conviction relief. Holley raises one issue which we revise and restate as whether this court erred in dismissing Holley’s appeal. We grant rehearing to expand upon the mailbox rule and affirm our original decision.
- Holiday Hospitality Franchising, Inc. v. Amco Insurance Co. - Here there is no moving party, the Court appears to have granted transfer on its own initiative. This is a 3-page, 2-paragraph Jan. 18th opinion of the COA on a petition for rehearing:
In our opinion we noted that the reversal of summary judgment only applied as against Holiday Hospitality, not the other defendants in the trial court action, because Holiday Hospitality is the only party that appealed. The Petitioners argue our reversal of summary judgment should apply to Holiday Inn and Megha as well, relying on Appellate Rule 17(A), which provides “[a] party of record in the trial court . . . shall be a party on appeal.” * * *
Thus, while all parties below may be parties to the appeal, the reversal of summary judgment only applies to Holiday Hospitality. The other Petitioners forfeited the right to appeal the trial court’s grant of summary judgment against them.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 11, 2012 04:57 PM
Posted to Indiana Transfer Lists