Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
Judge, Indiana Court of Appeals
Civil Commitment of Tk v. Community Hosp. North
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-06-07
This case concerned an appeal by T.K. from a civil commitment order issued in connection with Community Hospital North. The Indiana Court of Appeals disposed of the matter through an unpublished memorandum decision that dismissed the appeal. Judge Riley authored the decision, in which Judges Najam and Darden concurred, without further elaboration on the grounds for dismissal in the provided opinion text.
healthcarecivil rightsprocedure
In Re DW
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-06-06
In the Matter of the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.W., K.K., Ke.K., and L.W., the Indiana Court of Appeals reviewed a trial court's order terminating J.K.'s parental rights to his four children after the Indiana Department of Child Services initiated CHINS proceedings in 2009 due to the mother's homelessness, substance abuse, and failure to enroll the oldest child in school, compounded by the father's incarceration. The children were placed in foster care, and the father was ordered to complete substance abuse assessments and treatment, random drug screens, home-based services, and counseling. The Court of Appeals affirmed the termination, holding that the father's repeated failures to comply with services—such as missing drug screens for most of the two-year period, testing positive for heroin and other substances when tested, not completing outpatient treatment or home-based services, and experiencing ongoing instability in housing and employment—supported the trial court's conclusion that the conditions resulting in the children's removal would not be remedied. The court noted the father's history of sporadic participation and a period of complete disengagement outweighed his recent claims of sobriety and receptiveness to services.
family law
PUZYNSKI v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-06-06
The case of Puzyński v. State was a criminal appeal filed in the Indiana Court of Appeals under case number 71A05-1111-CR-590. The court reviewed the trial court's decision and issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's ruling. Judges Riley, Najam, and Darden all concurred in the result. No further details or reasoning appear in the excerpted opinion.
criminal law
Adams v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-05-24 · cited 4×
In Adams v. State, Samantha Adams appealed the denial of her motion to dismiss felony charges for dealing in and possessing more than 30 grams of marijuana, arguing that Indiana Code § 35-48-1-19 is unconstitutionally vague because it excludes “mature stalks” from the definition of marijuana without defining the term, leading different labs to weigh plants inconsistently. The trial court had denied the motion after a forensic scientist testified to cutting stalks below the first branch per lab protocol, and the appellate court affirmed. The Court of Appeals held that the sentencing enhancements for weight apply to “pure or adulterated” marijuana, so any stalks retained in the weighing process still qualify as adulterated marijuana supporting the felony charges; therefore the lack of a precise statutory definition of “mature stalks” did not render the statute vague as applied to Adams. The court interpreted the statute’s structure to give effect to the legislature’s intent that quantity enhancements cover adulterated material and concluded the trial court properly denied dismissal.
criminal lawprocedure
Sharkey v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-05-23 · cited 22×
In Sharkey v. State, Gabriel Sharkey appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to intimidation as a Class D felony for threatening a police officer over the phone that he would arrive at his daughter's high school "with [his] guns blaring" and "let everybody have it" with a twelve-gauge shotgun, prompting a lockdown that affected nearly 1,800 students and hundreds of faculty. The trial court imposed the advisory 1.5-year suspended sentence under the plea agreement's cap, declined to enter the conviction as a Class A misdemeanor, and found the harm exceeded what was needed to prove the offense as an aggravating factor while rejecting remorse or other mitigators. The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion because the school-wide disruption justified the aggravator, Sharkey's attempts to minimize the threat undermined any claim of remorse, and the sentence was not inappropriate given the offense's impact on the community and his lack of candor at sentencing.
criminal law
Alderman v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals · 2012-05-17
In Alderman v. State, the defendant appealed a criminal case ruling from an Indiana trial court. On May 17, 2012, the Court of Appeals of Indiana issued an unpublished memorandum decision affirming the lower court's outcome. The panel consisted of Judge Riley, who authored the disposition, along with Judges Najam and Darden, both of whom concurred. No further details on the underlying facts, issues, or legal analysis appear in the provided decision text.
criminal law