Monday, December 08, 2014
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 6 NFP)
For publication opinions today (2):
In Randal L. Young v. Indiana Department of Correction, Bruce Lemmon, David J. Donahue, Stanley Knight et. al., a 7-page opinion, Judge Robb writes:
Randal Young, who is currently incarcerated in the Indiana Department of Correction (“DOC”), brought this suit challenging the constitutionality of the DOC’s policy concerning the restoration of credit time for inmates. The trial court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of the DOC, and Young now brings this appeal pro se. Young raises one issue for our review: whether the DOC’s policy regarding the restoration of credit time denies equal protection of the law to prisoners serving consecutive sentences. Concluding the DOC’s challenged policy does not result in disparate treatment, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. * * *In Brian S. Adcock v. State of Indiana, a 19-page opinion, Judge Barnes writes:
We conclude that Section IX.E-9(d) of the DOC’s Disciplinary Code for Adult Offenders, which limits restoration of credit time to credit time deprived during an offender’s current sentence, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or Article 1, Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution as the policy applies to offenders serving consecutive sentences. Because, as the DOC’s policy currently stands, there is no set of circumstances under which Young’s claim entitles him to relief, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Brian Adcock appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief (“PCR petition”), which challenged his convictions for two counts of Class A felony child molesting and two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor. We reverse and remand.NFP civil opinions today (0):
The combined and restated issue before us is whether Adcock’s appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence against him on direct appeal. * * *
The trial court erred in granting the State’s motion for summary disposition. Rather, we conclude as a matter of law that Adcock received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. We reverse and remand for the granting of Adcock’s PCR petition and the vacating of Adcock’s convictions for two counts of Class A felony child molesting and two counts of Class B felony sexual misconduct with a minor.
NFP criminal opinions today (6):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 8, 2014 11:25 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions