Jillian C. Keating

Attorney

Jillian

Emailjkeating@chwlaw.com

Direct Line317-660-7346

Phone 317-844-4693

Fax317-573-5385

Jillian C. Keating concentrates her practice in the areas of criminal defense and family law. Jillian joined Coots, Henke & Wheeler in 2007, and is currently a partner within the firm.

Criminal Defense

Jillian has experience handling a wide array of criminal defense matters including defending drunk driving charges, drug possession and dealing, battery, minor consumption/illegal possession of alcohol, sentence modifications, violations of probation, traffic offenses, and other misdemeanor and felony charges. She helps her clients obtain specialized driving privileges if their license is suspended, whether they have been adjudged a Habitual Traffic Violator, or simply suspended due to BMV or court order.  Jillian also assists clients with clearing their criminal record through Indiana’s Second Chance Expungement Law. She works with clients facing substance abuse addiction and is currently a defense attorney for the Hamilton County Drug Court. When necessary, Jillian uses her trial experience to defend client’s rights and has previous experience arguing in front of the Indiana Supreme Court.

Family Law

Jillian focuses her family law practice on divorce, custody disputes, child support, paternity, and post-dissolution matters, including emancipation and the establishment of post-secondary educational expenses. She can assist with all phases of family law dispute resolution ranging from agreement, mediation, and trial. Jillian volunteers and is an advocate with the Hamilton County Guardian Ad Litem Program. The mission of the Hamilton County Guardian Ad Litem (GAL) Program is to advocate for the best interest of children involved in court proceedings.

Criminal Law

  • D.W.G. v State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2016):  Law enforcement obtained a search warrant of client's residence, based upon hearsay tips provided by a deactivated confidential informant and an anonymous source.  Client was charged based upon the fruits of the search of his home, and after denial of his motion to suppress the search, was convicted at trial of Class C felony dealing in marijuana and Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance.  On appeal, client argued that the execution of the search warrant was illegal and violated his rights pursuant to the Fourth Amendment of the United Sates Constitution and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.  Client argued that law enforcement failed to establish the credibility of the two hearsay tips used to obtain the search warrant, failed to meaningfully corroborate the information received, and failed to disclose the deactivation of the confidential informant to the judge that issued the warrant.  The Court of Appeals agreed, and determined that the two uncorroborated tips failed to provide sufficient evidence of probable cause for issuing the warrant.  The Court further found law enforcement did not act in good faith, based upon the reckless omission of material facts regarding the tips when seeking the warrant.  The convictions were reversed in favor of client.
  • Aaron L. Anderson, III, v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2013); After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felony, a Class B Felony. Defendant appealed that conviction, which the Court of Appeals affirmed. Anderson thereafter petitioned the Indiana Supreme Court to accept jurisdiction over the appeal on grounds the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction as he was ultimately apprehended by the police without physical possession of the firearm, bullets, or any other tangible link to the found weapon. The Indiana Supreme Court did not grant transfer.

Family Law

  • In the Matter of S.S., A Child Alleged to Be a Child In Need of Services (Ind. Ct. App. 2008); Mother appealed a Finding by the Hamilton County Circuit Court that terminated her parental rights. Mother argued that there was not clear and convincing evidence that established that termination was in the best interests of the child, that a satisfactory plan for the care and treatment of the child existed, and that there was a reasonable probability that she could remedy the reasons why the child was placed outside the home. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling.

Education

Law School

Valparaiso University School of Law, Indiana (J.D., 2007)

Undergraduate

Valparaiso University (B.A., 2004)

Bars & Admissions

Indiana

U.S. District Court for Northern District of Indiana

U.S. District Court for Southern District of Indiana

 

Awards & Recognition
  • Indiana Rising Stars® (2010-2011, 2016-2017)
Memberships
  • Hamilton County Bar Association - President (2016-2017)
  • Indianapolis Bar Association
  • Indiana Bar Association
  • American Bar Association
Community Involvement
  • Hamilton County Guardian Ad Litem Program - Volunteer