Monday, May 16, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 5/16/16):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 5/23/16):
Thursday, May 26
- 9:00 AM - A.W. v. R.W. (29S02-1603-PO-135) The Hamilton Superior Court conducted an evidentiary hearing and extended a protective order previously issued. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the trial court erred by admitting certain evidence at the hearing. A.W. v. R.W. (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: In this opinion, as issued Nov. 30, 2015 by the Court of Appeals, and now vacated, the COA reversed and remanded with instructions to vacate the protective order against AW.
Webcasts of Supreme Court oral arguments are available here.
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 5/16/16):
- No oral arguments currently scheduled.
Next week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 5/23/16):Monday, May 23
- 1:00 PM - Arion v. State (08A02-1508-CR-01278) On 9/6/13, the Carroll Circuit Court issued a warrant instructing the Sheriff of Carroll County to arrest Ricky Arion on charges of burglary, sexual battery, and criminal confinement. Arion was incarcerated in Miami County on unrelated charges at the time. On 9/10/13, a law enforcement agent of the DOC served the warrant on Arion and gave him a copy. Arion filed a motion for speedy trial under Criminal Rule 4(B) in the Carroll Circuit Court on 9/13/13. On 12/16/13, Arion filed a motion to dismiss the charges against him, as he had not been brought to trial within 70 days. The trial court denied the motion, holding that because the Sheriff had not returned the warrant to the court as served, Arion had not been arrested under the new charges, and Criminal Rule 4 did not apply. Arion filed a motion to reconsider, including a copy of the warrant that was served on him, but the trial court denied this motion as well. The trial court held an initial hearing in the case on 5/22/15, setting it for trial on 10/5/15. Arion objected as this date fell more than 2 years after he had been charged. Arion filed a motion for discharge on 7/10/15. The trial court acknowledged that Arion had been arrested on 9/10/13, when he was read the warrant, and that he had made this known to the trial court by attaching a copy of the warrant to his motion to reconsider. However, the trial court denied Arion's motion, holding that, because it had not seen the copy of the warrant attached to Arion's motion, it had continued to operate under the belief that the warrant had not been served, and was not made actually aware that Arion had been arrested until 3/26/15. As the trial court held this date to be the date that Arion had been arrested for Criminal Rule 4 purposes, it found no Rule 4 violation. The trial court also found that Arion's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial had not been violated. The trial court certified this judgment for interlocutory appeal and this Court accepted jurisdiction.
The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, May and Brown. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 2:00 PM - Purvi Patel v. State (71A04-1504-CR-166) Purvi Patel purchased misoprostol and mifepristone from a Hong Kong pharmacy online and used those drugs to terminate her pregnancy at home. She delivered a live baby of approximately 25 weeks' gestation who died shortly after birth. She did not seek medical care until after the baby died. Patel was charged with and convicted of neglect of a dependent as a Class A felony and feticide, a Class B felony. On appeal, Patel argues that her neglect of a dependent conviction should be reversed because it is not supported by sufficient evidence. She also argues that her feticide conviction should be reversed because the feticide statute is either inapplicable or unconstitutional in this situation. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Chief Judge Vaidik, Judges Bailey and Crone. [Where: Supreme Court Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
ONLY those Court of Appeals oral arguments presented in the Supreme or Court of Appeals Courtrooms generally will be accessible via videocast. Past Court of Appeals oral arguments 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 May 16, 2016 07:50 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments