Monday, December 05, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Upcoming oral arguments this week and next
This week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 12/5/16):
Thursday, December 8
- 9:00 AM - Marcus Zanders v. State of Indiana (15S01-1611-CR-00571) A Dearborn County jury convicted Marcus Zanders of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm. A majority of the Court of Appeals reversed his convictions, concluding the warrantless seizure of historical location data compiled by Zanders’ cellular network provider violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Zanders v. State, 58 N.E.3d 254 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was this was an Aug. 4, 2016, 2-1 COA opinion (3rd case). See news coverage here ("Police must get warrant for cell phone location data") and here ("Ind. Court Says Warrant Needed to Get Cell Tower Data").
Next week's oral arguments before the Supreme Court (week of 12/12/16):
Thursday, December 15
- 9:00 AM - Thomas Pinner v. State of Indiana (49S02-1611-CR-00610) The Marion Superior Court denied Thomas Pinner’s motion to suppress evidence. On interlocutory appeal, a majority of the Court of Appeals reversed, holding police made an investigatory stop for which they lacked reasonable suspicion in violation of the Fourth Amendment. Pinner v. State, 59 N.E.3d 275 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), vacated. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer the case and has assumed jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was a 2-1 Aug. 24, 2016 COA opinion (4th case), where the majority wrote:
As the officers did not have reasonable suspicion to stop Pinner and this was not a consensual encounter, the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to suppress. As such, we reverse.
- 9:45 AM - Consumer Attorney Services v. State of Indiana (49A05-1504-PL-00274) The State filed suit against an out-of-state company and its principal member, alleging violations of four consumer protection statutes. The defendants sought summary judgment on grounds they are exempt from liability under the statutes. The trial court denied the defendants’ motion. On interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding the company was exempt from liability on all but one of the State’s claims but that the company’s principal member was not personally exempt from liability. Consumer Attorney Services v. State, 53 N.E.3d 599 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans. pending. The State has petitioned the Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal.
ILB: This was this was a May 23, 2016, COA opinion (3rd case).
This week's oral arguments before the Court of Appeals (week of 12/5/16):
Tuesday, December 6
- 1:00 PM - Michael Diaz v. State (71A03-1603-CR-629) Appellant-Defendant Michael Diaz was convicted of Level 4 felony burglary. Diaz challenges his conviction on appeal, arguing that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction. In raising this argument, Diaz asserts that the evidence is insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he broke and entered the dwelling of another with the intent to commit a felony. For its part, Appellee-Plaintiff the State of Indiana argues that the evidence is sufficient to sustain Diaz’s conviction for burglary. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, Robb and Bradford. [Where: Fountain Central High School, 750 US 136, Veedersburg, IN]
- 1:00 PM - Rachel Neal v. IAB Financial Bank (02A03-1604-CT-01002) Rachel Neal was injured in a collision with a car driven by Gabriel Biddle. Before the collision employees of IAB Financial Bank helped Biddle, who they suspected was intoxicated, change a flat tire. Neal argued the bank gratuitously assumed a duty toward her when it helped an intoxicated driver return to the streets. The trial court entered summary judgment for the Bank on the ground it had no duty. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges May, Crone and Altice. [Where: Allen County Courthouse, Fort Wayne, IN]
- 1:00 PM - Dennis Garner v. Gregory S. Kempf and Clerk of Vanderburgh County (Not Provided) Garner was awarded a civil judgment against Kempf in 2013. In 2015, Kempf was arrested on an unrelated criminal matter and a $5,000 bond was posted on his behalf. Garner filed a motion for proceedings supplemental seeking to attach the bond proceeds and served the Vanderburgh County Clerk with notice, along with a letter informing the Clerk that a judicial lien attached as of the date the Clerk received notice such that the Clerk could be held liable if it released the funds to anyone else. Neither Garner nor the Clerk did anything to notify the criminal court of Garner’s claim to the bond proceeds, and the criminal court subsequently ordered the funds released to Kempf’s criminal defense attorney pursuant to Kempf’s request. The Clerk complied with the criminal court’s order, and at a subsequent hearing in the civil court on his motion for proceedings supplemental, Garner argued that judgment should be entered against the Clerk in the amount of $5,000 for its failure to honor his lien. The trial court rejected this argument, reasoning that it was Garner’s duty to notify the criminal court of his claim to the bond proceeds and that he had failed to do so. Garner now appeals.
The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Bradford, Pyle and Altice. [Where: Court of Appeals Courtroom (WEBCAST)]
- 2:30 PM - Mario Deon Watkins v. State of Indiana (Not Provided) Mario Deon Watkins appeals his convictions for two counts of possession of a controlled substance as class A misdemeanors, possession of cocaine as a level 6 felony, possession of marijuana as a class B misdemeanor, and maintaining a common nuisance as a level 6 felony. Watkins argues that the search that led to the discovery of evidence violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution because the underlying search warrant lacked probable cause. He also contends that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence discovered as a result of the search because the execution of the warrant, which included the use of a flash bang device in a room where a child was present, was unreasonable under the Indiana Constitution. The Scheduled Panel Members are: Judges Baker, May and Brown. [Where: Court of Appeals 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 December 5, 2016 08:23 AM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments