« Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit decides one Indiana case today | Main | Ind. Courts - "Peers laud Lake judge" »

Friday, October 17, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 6 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Eddie Cantrell and Cantrell Bldg. Svcs., Inc. v. Putnam Co. Sheriff's Dept. and the State of Indiana , a 13-page opinion, Judge Brown writes:

Eddie Cantrell (“Cantrell”) and Cantrell Building Services, Inc. (“Corporation”), appeal the trial court’s judgment for the Putnam County Sheriff’s Department (“Sheriff’s Department”) and the State of Indiana (“State”). Cantrell and the Corporation raise two issues, which we consolidate and restate as whether the trial court erred by ordering the forfeiture of a vehicle owned by the Corporation after Cantrell was arrested with drugs in the vehicle. We affirm.

The relevant facts follow. Cantrell was the president and sole shareholder of the Corporation, which owned a 2005 Cadillac Escalade. The Corporation provided the Escalade to Cantrell as part of his compensation package. In November 2005, Cantrell went on a hunting trip for personal pleasure to Kansas City and drove the Escalade. On November 4, 2005, as Cantrell was returning from the trip, Deputy Dwight Simmons stopped Cantrell for having a false and fictitious registration. During a search of the vehicle,1 Deputy Simmons found six grams of cocaine in the vehicle. The cocaine was for Cantrell’s personal use. Cantrell was ultimately convicted of possession of cocaine as a class C felony.

The Sheriff’s Department and the State filed a complaint for forfeiture of the Cadillac Escalade pursuant to Ind. Code §§ 34-24-1. After a bench trial, the trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law granting the forfeiture request.

The issue is whether the trial court erred by ordering the forfeiture of the vehicle owned by the Corporation after Cantrell was arrested with drugs in the vehicle. * * *

Because Cantrell’s knowledge is imputed to the Corporation, we conclude that the State and Putnam County proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Corporation knew or had reason to know of Cantrell’s possession of drugs in the Escalade. The trial court’s order granting the forfeiture of the vehicle is not clearly erroneous. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the trial court’s forfeiture order.

In Christopher Mann v. State of Indiana , a 9-page opinion, Judge Robb writes:
Following a jury trial, Christopher Mann appeals his conviction and sentence for aggravated battery, a Class B felony. On appeal, Mann raises two issues, which we restate as 1) whether sufficient evidence supports Mann’s conviction and 2) whether Mann’s sentence violates the Proportionality Clause of Article I, Section 16, of the Indiana Constitution. Concluding that sufficient evidence supports Mann’s conviction and that his sentence does not violate the Proportionality Clause, we affirm.NFP civil opinions today (2):

James H. Bowden and Edward E. Bowden v. City of West Lafayette, Indiana (NFP) - "Here, Appellants’ counsel has failed to support his argument with cogent reasoning and citation to authorities in support of his position. The failure to make a cogent argument is equivalent to a failure to file a brief. Bright v. Kuehl, 650 N.E.2d 311, 317 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995). Consequently, the issues presented here on appeal are waived, and the decision of the trial court is affirmed."

The Matter of the Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of A.T., IV, and A.T. (minors); A.T., III (father) v. Vanderburgh Co. Dept. of Child Svcs. (NFP) "Alfred T., III (“Father”) appeals the involuntary termination of his parental rights, in Vanderburgh Superior Court, to his children, A.T. IV, and A.T. Father challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s judgment. We affirm."

NFP criminal opinions today (4):

Yulonda Glover a/k/a Bashon Glover v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Vernando Ross v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Vanessa Y. Leslie v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Antiowan D. Loftin v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 17, 2008 12:52 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions