Wow. Time to renew the Thorzine.<quoted text>
Well the last idiot Ct. of Appls decision is State of Indiana vs. Karl Jackson - N.E.2d -. Judge Robb (a screaming liberal, wife of a Purdue Professor) decided to ignore 10 years of previous precedent and a plain reading of the Indiana Code to decide that the Bureau of Motor Vehicles must jump through impossible legal hoops to "notify" scum bag repeat drunk drivers that no longer hold licenses that they are Habitual Traffic Violators. Guess What Jack Turd.. thats one of many!
As to your citation of this Jackson case, you failed to mention (and probably comprehend) that the Court of Appeals did not "free" Jackson. The lower court had already determined that the statute was not satisfied, the Jackson lacked actual knowledge of the suspension. It was the State that appealed the trial court. You (and the State) may not like the law, but that is what the law requires. You could lobby the legislature to put an affirmative duty on drivers to always know their license status before driving a car, and they may just go for the idea. But, that's not the law. So, the trial court said the charge of driving while under habitual traffic violator status was not proven under the statute that created the offense.
C'mon. You said that there were "so many decisions" that "let crooks out." This case let nobody out. He was never put in because, under that pesky thing called "a law" he wasn't in violation. You're not calling for a change to allow prosecutors and police to just say "that's illegal," and throw people in jail, without first going through the legislative process to write a law, and then require that the specifics of the law be met, are you?