Monday, September 03, 2012
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 9/3/12):
Thursday, September 6th
- 9:00 AM - D.C. v. J.A.C. (32S04-1206-DR-349) - In this post-dissolution proceeding, a mother with physical custody of her child filed a notice of her intent to relocate with her child to another state. The trial court held a hearing and granted the father’s request for physical custody, finding that modification of physical custody is in the child’s best interest. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous and reversed. D.C. v. J.A.C., 966 N.E.2d 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a March 30, 2012 opinion (5th case) regarding relocation in another state by the mother.
- 9:45 AM - Curtis A. Bethea v. State of Indiana (18S05-1206-PC-304) - Bethea pleaded guilty to two class B felonies, and was sentenced to an aggregate term of forty years, the maximum allowed pursuant to a plea agreement. In post-conviction proceedings, the Delaware Circuit Court rejected Bethea’s argument that counsel had been ineffective in not challenging the trial court’s consideration of the victims’ loss and other items during sentencing. A divided Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief in Bethea v. State, 964 N.E.2d 255 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a March 20th, 35-page, 2-1, three-opinion decision, with the court denying post-conviction relief.
- 10:30 AM - Todd J. Crider v. State of Indiana (91S05-1206-CR-306) - Crider pleaded guilty to a class D felony and an habitual offender charge. The White Superior Court ordered the sentence to be served consecutive to another sentence that also included an habitual offender enhancement. A divided Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal on grounds that the plea agreement specified Crider had waived his right to challenge the sentence on the basis that it is erroneous. Crider v. State, 966 N.E.2d 675 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: From the 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.”
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of (9/10/12):
Monday, September 10th
- 9:00 AM - Commissioner of the Indiana Department of Insurance. v. Tim Black (64S05-1206-CT-305) - Black filed a petition for payment of excess damages from the Patient’s Compensation Fund. However, Black did not produce the settlement agreement reached with a defendant in the underlying medical malpractice action, citing a confidentiality clause in that agreement. The trial court denied a motion filed by the Commissioner seeking dismissal without prejudice of Black’s petition, and the court later entered judgment for Black based on stipulated damages. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded. Comm’r of the Indiana Dep’t of Ins. v. Black, 962 N.E.2d 675 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: 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."
- 9:45 AM - Kimberly Heaton v. State of Indiana (48S02-1206-CR-350) - The Madison Superior Court revoked Heaton’s probation. Citing Indiana Code section 35-38-2-3(e), the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded on grounds the trial court had used an incorrect standard (“probable cause” instead of “preponderance of the evidence”) in finding that Heaton had committed theft while on probation. Heaton v. State, 959 N.E.2d 330 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a Dec. 28, 2011 opinion where the COA held: "We hold that the terms of probation regarding Heaton’s address were not vague, but that the trial court did abuse its discretion by using the incorrect legal standard in determining if Heaton committed another offense."
- 10:30 AM - Lisa J. Kane v. State of Indiana (30S04-1206-CR-372) - In the Hancock Superior Court, Lisa Kane was convicted of receiving stolen property, a class D felony, and found to be an habitual offender. In a not-for-publication memorandum decision, a divided Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, rejecting Kane’s arguments concerning the sufficiency of the evidence and the instructions that were given to the jury. Kane v. State, No. 30A04-1109-CR-488, slip op. (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 27, 2012), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This is a 2-1 NFP 4/27/12 COA opinion where the dissent concludes: "If the State had wanted a jury instruction on accomplice liability, it could have tendered one based on Indiana Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 2.11, which tracks the language of the accomplice liability statute. I also cannot conclude that the giving of this instruction was harmless, given that I believe this case was a very 'close call' on the question of Kane’s guilt. I vote to reverse Kane’s conviction."
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 9/3/12):
Wednesday, September 5th
- 1:00 PM - Thomas H. Andrews v. State of Indiana ( 29A02-1112-MI-1166) - Andrews, who currently resides in Indiana, pleaded guilty to charges of rape and abuse of a child in Massachusetts in 1984. Andrews completed his sentence in 1989, and moved to Indiana in 1993. Andrews lived outside of the state in 1996, but returned to Indiana in 1997. Andrews has not been arrested for any sex offense while residing in Indiana. Under Indiana’s sex offender registration requirements, Andrews is classified as a sexually violent predator who must register for life. Andrews argues that because he committed his crimes in another state before registration requirements took effect in either Massachusetts or Indiana, the requirement that he register as a sexually violent predator violates the ex post facto clause of the Indiana Constitution as applied to him. In response, the State argues that even if requiring Andrews to register under Indiana’s sex offender registry act violates the prohibition against ex post facto laws, Andrews has an independent obligation to register as a sex offender under the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), which Congress passed in 2006. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Vaidik, Mathias and Barnes. [Where: Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, 530 West New York Street, Room 100, Indianapolis (Webcast to be available later)]
Thursday, September 6th
- 10:30 AM - Professional Veterinary Products LTD v. Pharmakon Long Term Care Pharmacy (49A02-1110-CC-980) - Appellant-Plaintiff Professional Veterinary Products, LTD ("PVP") appeals the trial court's order limiting Appellee-Defendant Paul Elmer's personal liability for certain purchases by Appellee-Defendant Beterinary Inventory Solutions, Inc. ("VIS") to $3000. The questions presented on appeal include: (1) whether Elmer's personal guarantee applies to the purchases made by VIS; and (2) if so, should Elmer's liability under his personal guarantee be limited to $3000. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Robb, Judges Baker and Bradford. [Where: Indiana Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 9/10/12):
- No arguments currently scheduled.
ONLY those Court of Appeals oral arguments presented in the Supreme or Court of Appeals Courtrooms will be accessible via videocast.
The past COA webcasts which have been webcast are accessible here.
NOTE: For a printable version of this list of upcoming oral arguments, click on the date in the next line. Then select "Print" from your browser.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 3, 2012 07:47 PM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments