2011-154-C.A.  State v. Julie Long                                                           (show cause)
The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for one count of manufacturing or cultivating marijuana, for which she received a 10-year sentence, with 18 months to serve and the remainder suspended with probation.  On appeal she asserts that the trial justice erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal and argues that the trial justice erred in providing an instruction on aiding and abetting.

2011-157-C.A.  State v. Bradley Bellem                                                    (show cause)

The defendant appeals from an adjudication of probation violation for violating a no-contact order.  The defendant argues that the state failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that a violation had occurred. 

2011-178-C.A.  State v. Dean DeRobbio & Joseph Joubert                      (full briefing)

The state appeals from a pretrial order dismissing a five-count criminal information based on The Edward O. Hawkins and Thomas C. Slater Medical Marijuana Act.  On appeal the state challenges the trial justice’s interpretation of the act.   

2011-190-C.A.           State v. Mark Ceppi                                                    (full briefing)
2011-342-A.   In re Amiah P.                                                                        (show cause)
2012-22-M.P.

The respondent mother appeals from a decree terminating her parental rights to her daughter Amiah.  The respondent father is before this Court on a petition for certiorari seeking review of the decree terminating his parental rights to Amiah.  The respondent mother argues that the Family Court judge erred in precluding her from testifying that she had previously falsely asserted that the respondent father had assaulted her.  The respondent father argues that the Family Court judge erred in terminating his parental rights on the basis of his incarceration and abandonment.  He contends that the Family Court judge erred in making no findings on DCYF’s reasonable efforts to strengthen his parental relationship with Amiah.  He also argues that the respondent mother should have been permitted to testify that she falsely accused him of assaulting her.    

11-116-A. Robert Hazard v. Connie Hazard                                                  (show cause)

This dispute centers on the equitable distribution of assets relating to the appreciation during the marriage of two parcels of real property owned individually by plaintiff.  After the execution of the marital settlement agreement whereby plaintiff agreed to pay defendant for the increase in value, plaintiff obtained a second appraisal that brought the agreed-upon value of the appreciation into question.  Defendant sought to enforce the agreement, and plaintiff sought a reformation based upon the second appraisal.  The Family Court found that there was no basis for reforming the agreement, and entered judgment in favor of defendant.  This case raises issues addressed by this Court in the case of Gorman v. Gorman, 883 A.2d 732 (R.I. 2005), relating to contractual property settlement agreements submitted for the review and approval of the Family Court.

2011-040-A.  In re Gabrielle D.                                                                        (show cause)

This case is before the Court on appeal by the respondent-father from a decree of the Family Court, terminating his parental rights to his daughter.  On appeal, respondent asserts that the trial justice erred: 1) in finding that DCYF made reasonable efforts to correct the situation that led to Gabrielle’s removal from the parental home; 2) in finding that the respondent had abandoned Gabrielle for the six-month period set forth in Rhode Island General Laws § 15-7-7(a)(4); 3) in granting the termination based in part on grounds that respondent had a substance abuse problem that would make reunification with Gabrielle unlikely in a reasonable period of time, pursuant to §15-7-7(a)(3); and, 4) in granting termination based in part on grounds that respondent has exhibited behavior or conduct that is seriously detrimental to the child, for a duration so as to render it improbable for the parent to care for the child for an extended period of time, pursuant to § 15-7-7(a)(2)(vii), given that the court made no findings of fact as to this allegation.

No. 11-40              In re Gabrielle D.                                                                  (show cause)