Friday, February 27, 2015
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 3 opinion(s) today (and 10 NFP memorandum decisions)
For publication opinions today (3):
In Mary Ann Crider v. Robert Crider , a 9-page opinion, Judge Riley writes:
[Issue] Whether the trial court erred in its calculation and division of the marital estate. * * *In State of Indiana v. John J. Arnold , a 14-page opinion, Judge Crone writes:
[W]e find that the trial court clearly erred by including the Florida Property as marital property, and we remand with instructions for the trial court to recalculate and redistribute, if necessary, the marital estate. * * *
[T]he tax debt is a marital liability and should have been considered by the trial court in fashioning an equitable division of property. * * *
Because Wife’s accounts were valued as of the Filing Date, her subsequent payment of the total tax debt effectively reduced her share of the marital estate, which is clearly inconsistent with the trial court’s intended distribution scheme. Therefore, we remand with instructions for the trial court to include the tax debt in the marital estate and to determine what portion, if any, should be allocated to Husband.
CONCLUSION. Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the trial court erred by including the Florida Property and by excluding the IRS debt in its calculation and distribution of the marital estate. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
The State of Indiana appeals the trial court’s grant of John J. Arnold’s motion to set aside his habitual offender enhancement. The State contends that the trial court erred in refusing to vacate Arnold’s entire plea agreement when it vacated his habitual offender enhancement. We conclude that Arnold’s motion to set aside habitual offender enhancement should be treated as a petition for postconviction relief and that the trial court’s judgment should be reviewed as an award of postconviction relief. We also conclude that the vacatur of Arnold’s habitual offender enhancement would frustrate the basic purpose of the plea agreement, and therefore the trial court erred in not setting the entire agreement aside. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.In Tyrone Shelton v. State of Indiana , an 11-page opinion, Judge Riley writes:
[Issue] Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence that was seized during the course of a warrantless search. * * *NFP civil decisions today (5):
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in admitting the evidence seized from Shelton’s property because Officer Flanagan’s search was justified by the combination of a reasonable suspicion that Shelton engaged in criminal activity and a search condition contained in his agreement with Community Corrections. Affirmed.
NFP criminal decisions today (5):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 27, 2015 10:45 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions