Main Menu
Oral Argument Preview: Week of June 8, 2009
Posted in Litigation

Indiana Supreme Court

On Thursday, June 11, the Indiana Supreme Court will hear argument in two cases.

  • At 9 a.m., the Court will hear Money v. State.  In this case, the defendant pled guilty to a class A felony and to being an habitual offender in a “blind plea.”  Later, Money petitioned for post-conviction relief, claiming that his counsel had been ineffective for failing to advise him he was not eligible for a habitual offender enhancement.  The Floyd Superior Court denied Money's petition.  The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed in this not-for-publication opinion.
  • At 9:45 a.m., the Court will hear Hamilton v. Hamilton.  In this case, Suzanne Hamilton filed an action in Indiana to enforce a Florida court order requiring Richard Hamilton to pay child support.  The Vanderburgh Superior Court entered multiple orders that found Richard in contempt, but stayed the related jail sentence on condition that Richard make child support payments in an amount less than that ordered by the Florida court. On Suzanne’s appeal from the order, the Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding the Superior Court had not modified the Florida child support order in violation of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act and Richard was not in contempt of the Superior Court order.  Hamilton v. Hamilton, 895 N.E.2d 397 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (available here).

Indiana Court of Appeals

  • At 1:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9, the Court will hear Maldonado v. State.  In this case, the defendant is appealing a denial of post-conviction relief where the court found evidence to be barred from trial because it was covered by the Rape Shield Statute.
  • At 2:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 10, the Court will hear Reed v. State.  In this case, a jury convicted the defendant of a class A felony for dealing in methamphetamine; a class D felony for neglect of a dependent; and a class A misdemeanor for possession of marijuana.  In this direct appeal, the defendant raises the following issues: (1) that the State’s initial dismissal of a class B felony for dealing in methamphetamine charge and subsequent refiling of the charge as a class A felony violated his substantial rights and his right to a speedy trial; (2) that the trial court erred in admitting illegally obtained evidence; and (3) that his sentence is inappropriate pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B).

To learn more about Meaghan Klem Haller and her practice, please visit her profile.

  • Partner

    Meaghan describes herself as an “unapologetic advocate” who will be upfront and honest with clients and thoroughly prepared on the law and facts of her cases.  She focuses her practice on corporate governance disputes, breaches ...



Recent Posts




Back to Page