« Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit decides two today | Main | Ind. Courts - Update on the sealing of records in the Clerk of the Courts Office »

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 7 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Charles Yowler v. State of Indiana , a 7-page opinion, Judge Bradford writes:

Following a bench trial, the trial court convicted Appellant-Defendant Charles Yowler of one count of Resisting Law Enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, and one count of Disorderly Conduct, a Class B misdemeanor. Yowler challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions and claims that the arresting officer‟s conduct was outrageous and should therefore excuse Yowler‟s conduct. We affirm the convictions. * * *

In any event, the evidence most favorable to the trial court‟s judgment indicates that Officer Hacker‟s conduct was not outrageous. At the request of Principal Myers, Officer Hacker served Yowler with the school‟s “bar letter,” conduct the trial court specifically found to be within the scope of her duties. After Yowler became confrontational and failed to follow orders, Officer Hacker slapped Yowler. The evidence indicates that Officer Hacker was acting to protect herself and to effect a lawful arrest. Yowler‟s claim of outrageous conduct is without merit.

NFP civil opinions today (2):

Jack's Wholesale Windows and Design of Hammond, Inc.; et al. v. Mark Flesher, Lakeside Contractor Supply, Inc.; et al. (NFP) - "In this interlocutory appeal, Appellant-Plaintiff Jack’s Wholesale Windows and Design of Hammond, Inc. (“Jack’s”) challenges the trial court’s denial of its motion for sanctions, to compel discovery, for issuance of contempt citation, and entry of judgment against Appellees-Defendants Mark Flesher, Lakeside Contractor Supply, Inc., and James Flamini (collectively, “Defendants”). Upon appeal, Jack’s challenges the trial court’s ruling on several grounds. On cross-appeal, the Defendants claim that this appeal is not properly before this court because it was not timely filed. Concluding that Jack’s has waived its claims on appeal, we affirm. * * *

"Our review of this appeal is fatally impeded by Jack’s’ failure to conform to Indiana Appellate Rules 46(A)(5), (6), and 46(A)(8)(a). Jack’s’ Statement of the Case and Statement of the Facts in its brief is a stream-of-consciousness recitation of alleged events purportedly leading to the instant appeal but unsupported by necessary citation to or documentation in the record. Much of Jack’s’ brief is unaccompanied by record citations, and certain record citations which are included merely refer to Jacks’s’ own petitions containing similarly undocumented assertions. * * * Accordingly, we deem Jack’s’ claims waived and therefore find it unnecessary to address the Defendants’ cross-appeal."

In Re J.S., L.S., and D.S.; Latavia S. v. Elkhart Co. Dept. of Child Svcs. (NFP) - "Latavia Scott (“Scott”) appeals the voluntary termination of her parental rights to J.S., L.S., and D.S. (the “Children”). We affirm."

NFP criminal opinions today (5):

Eric Jackson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jermaine D'Shann Dodd v. State of Indiana (NFP)

David Scruby v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jermel Martin v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Steven Gachett v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 8, 2008 01:43 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions