David Earl Ison v. State of Indiana

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in David Earl Ison v. State of Indiana. Read the opinion of the Court — 2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 118
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided May 8, 2017·No. 24A04-1607-PC-1618·Published

Opinion

FILED May 08 2017, 5:37 am OPINION ON REHEARING CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court

APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE David Earl Ison Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Carlisle, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana

Ian McLean Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

David Earl Ison, May 8, 2017 Appellant-Petitioner, Court of Appeals Case No. 24A04-1607-PC-1618 v. Appeal from the Franklin Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable J. Steven Cox, Appellee-Respondent Judge Trial Court Cause No. 24C01-1407-PC-630

Altice, Judge.

[1] The State seeks rehearing and asks that we delete footnote three of our opinion.

In that footnote, we erroneously concluded that Ind. Code § 35-50-2-9 contains

a technical error. We agree that rehearing is appropriate and therefore grant

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion on Rehearing 24A04-1607-PC-1618 | May 8, 2017 Page 1 of 2 rehearing to delete the second paragraph of footnote three. In all other respects

the original opinion is affirmed.

Riley, J. and Crone, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion on Rehearing 24A04-1607-PC-1618 | May 8, 2017 Page 2 of 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

David Earl Ison v. State of Indiana, (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).

David Earl Ison v. State of Indiana (David Earl Ison v. State of Indiana) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

§ 35-50-2-9
Indiana § 35-50-2-9