Cases

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont __________________ NO. 09-25-00054-CV __________________ $10,970.00 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY (DONALD BARNES), Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS,

OPINION WALKER, Chief Justice. Donald Barnes pleaded guilty to evading detention, and also entered a plea of “true” to two prior felony convictions. See Tex. Pen.Code Ann. § 38.04 (Vernon Supp. 2001). Barnes’s indictment did not allege whether the two prior convictions were sequential but rather stated that, prior to the commission of the primary offense, Barnes was convicted for one previous fel

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan April 25, 2019 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice 158274

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan July 29, 2019 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice 158274(101)(

Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan April 25, 2019 Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

PER CURIAM: Denied. Relator does not identify an illegal term in his sentences, and therefore, his filing is properly construed as an application for post-conviction relief. See State v. Parker , 98-0256 (La. 5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694. As such, it is subject to the time limitation set forth in La.C.Cr.P. a

751 F.2d 384 Bradley (Donald Barnes)v.Rees (John D.) NO. 84-5153 United States Court of Appeals,sixth Circuit. NOV 08, 1984 1 Appeal From: W.D.Ky. 2 AFFIRMED.

In re Barnes, Donald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 402-960; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2013-K-0004. Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

In re Barnes, Donald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 402-960; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2012-K-0996. *439Denied. La.CCr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Petty, O’Brien and Senior Judge Frank Argued by teleconference PUBLISHED JOHN BERRY OPINION BY v. Record No. 0204-20-4 JUDGE WILLIAM G. PETTY JULY 14, 2020

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 8, 2018 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court's April 25, 2019 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that reconsideration of our previous order is warranted. MCR 7.311(G). The motions to strike are DENIED.

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant-appellant to accept the late reply that was submitted on October 23, 2018, is GRANTED.

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 8th day of May 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of June 2008."

In re Barnes, Donald; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial *267Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 402-960; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2010-K-llll. Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189. Cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).

I. Barnes first contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to sever his trial from Young's. Denial of a severance motion is an abuse of discretion if unsupported by the evidence or controlled by an error of law. State v. Spears , 393 S.C. 466, 475,

In re Barnes, Donald;—Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 402-960; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2001-KA-0113. Denied.

EDWARDS, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from denial of a petition for writ of habeas corpus which had been remanded to the District Judge for hearing when it was first presented to this court. See Bradley v. Cowan, 500 F.2d 380 (6th Cir. 1974). After full hearing the District Judge has again denied the writ, this time holding as to appellant’s principal issue claimi

893 N.E.2d 325 (2008) Donald BARNES and Barbara Barnes, Appellants, v. Michael E. McCARTY and State Farm Insurance Companies d/b/a State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellees. No. 82A05-0711-CV-650. Court of Appeals of Indiana. May 23, 2008. Publication Ordered June 25, 2008. *326 Robert R. Faulkner

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting permanent custody of the parties’ children to plaintiff without a hearing, based on defendant’s violation of previous court orders. The best interests of children should be determined only after a full hearing (see, Matter of Dorie v Hyde, 227 AD2d 915; Matt