Indiana Resisting Law Enforcement Lawyer

Indiana Resisting Law Enforcement Attorney Jeff Cardella

Resisting law enforcement is one of the most misunderstood criminal charges in Indiana. Many people assume that any disagreement with police, hesitation during an arrest, refusal to immediately comply, or attempt to walk away automatically qualifies as resisting law enforcement. That is not true. Indiana resisting law enforcement law is technical, fact-sensitive, and heavily shaped by appellate decisions interpreting Indiana Code 35-44.1-3-1. If you have questions about your case, call me at 317-695-7700 or email me for a free consultation.

I am Jeff Cardella. I have handled hundreds of resisting law enforcement cases throughout Indiana and taught this subject at the law school level. I do not approach these cases as simple “police said so” prosecutions. I look closely at the exact statutory language, the officer’s testimony, body camera footage, dispatch records, probable cause affidavits, suppression issues, and the Indiana appellate cases that define what the State actually has to prove.

A resisting law enforcement charge can be based on force, flight, or interference with the service or execution of a court order. Those are not the same thing. Resisting by force is different from resisting by flight. Resisting by flight on foot is different from fleeing in a vehicle. A misdemeanor resisting case is different from a felony resisting law enforcement case. Understanding those differences is often the key to winning the case.

I have obtained not guilty verdicts, Trial Rule 41(B) dismissals, suppression rulings, and favorable outcomes in resisting law enforcement cases and related criminal cases throughout Indiana. In one case, I obtained not guilty verdicts on resisting by flight and operating without a license after successfully challenging the State’s attempt to use a probable cause affidavit the officer had not personally typed or signed. In another case, I won on two counts of resisting law enforcement and a public intoxication charge through a Trial Rule 41(B) motion.

Full Text of Indiana’s Resisting Law Enforcement Statute

Indiana Code 35-44.1-3-1 provides that a person who knowingly or intentionally forcibly resists, obstructs, or interferes with a law enforcement officer while the officer is lawfully engaged in the execution of the officer’s duties commits resisting law enforcement. The statute also applies to forcibly resisting the authorized service or execution of a civil or criminal process or court order, and to fleeing from a law enforcement officer after the officer has, by visible or audible means, identified himself or herself and ordered the person to stop.

In basic form, resisting law enforcement is usually charged as a Class A misdemeanor. However, the charge can become a felony if a vehicle is used, if bodily injury occurs, if a deadly weapon is used, if substantial risk of bodily injury is created, or if other statutory enhancements apply.

The Three Main Ways Resisting Law Enforcement Is Charged in Indiana

Resisting by force: forcibly resisting, obstructing, or interfering with a law enforcement officer while the officer is lawfully engaged in official duties.
Resisting court process or orders: forcibly resisting, obstructing, or interfering with the authorized service or execution of a civil or criminal process or court order.
Resisting by flight: fleeing from a law enforcement officer after the officer has identified himself or herself by visible or audible means and ordered the person to stop.

Resisting Law Enforcement by Force in Indiana

Resisting law enforcement by force is often overcharged. Indiana courts have repeatedly explained that “forcibly” resisting requires more than mere disagreement, more than verbal argument, and more than passive noncompliance. Historically, Indiana courts required strong, powerful, or violent force directed toward the officer. Although later cases have sometimes softened that language, the State still must prove conduct that satisfies the forcible element.

That distinction matters. Many police reports describe conduct such as “tensed up,” “pulled away,” “would not give me his hands,” “refused commands,” or “turned away.” Sometimes those facts may support a resisting charge. Sometimes they do not. The details matter, and the officer’s exact words at trial often matter even more.

Important Indiana Cases on Resisting by Force

Spangler v. State — refusing to accept service of process and walking away was not forcible resistance.
Ajabu v. State — holding onto a flag and twisting or turning while officers attempted to seize it was not enough to prove forcible resistance.
Wellman v. State — bracing in a doorway, refusing to leave, and engaging in nonviolent protest did not prove resisting by force.
A.C. v. State — failing to stand when asked and leaning away during police interaction did not constitute forcible resistance.
Aguirre v. State — reaching into a purse for a cell phone and pulling an arm away did not establish the type of force required for conviction.
Adkisson v. State — where officers unlawfully entered a home, the officer was not lawfully engaged in the execution of duties.
Casselman v. State — attempting to close the door of a home during unlawful civil process service did not support a resisting conviction.
Stack v. State — the State must prove the defendant knew or had reason to know the person was a law enforcement officer.
Nieto v. State — an off-duty officer may still be lawfully engaged in official duties depending on the nature of the acts performed.
Tapp v. State — the issue is not merely whether the officer is on duty or in uniform, but whether the officer is acting in an official law enforcement capacity.

Resisting the Service of Court Orders or Process

Indiana law also criminalizes forcibly resisting, obstructing, or interfering with the authorized service or execution of civil process, criminal process, or a court order. This can include situations involving warrants, writs, protective orders, court papers, or other legal process.

However, the same word matters: forcibly. Simply refusing to accept paperwork, arguing with an officer, asking questions, or walking away is not always enough. In Spangler, the Indiana Supreme Court made clear that peaceful refusal to accept service did not equal forcible resistance. In Casselman, the Court of Appeals recognized important limits on officers attempting to force entry into a home while executing civil process.

Resisting Law Enforcement by Flight in Indiana

Resisting by flight is different from resisting by force. Indiana law provides that a person commits resisting law enforcement by flight when the person flees from a law enforcement officer after the officer has, by visible or audible means, identified himself or herself and ordered the person to stop.

Indiana courts have interpreted flight broadly. Running away can qualify. Walking away can sometimes qualify. Continuing to drive after police lights and sirens are activated can qualify. However, the State still must prove that the officer identified himself or herself, that an order to stop was given, that the defendant knew or reasonably should have known about the order, and that the defendant knowingly fled.

Important Indiana Cases on Resisting by Flight

Woodward v. State — continuing to drive for a lengthy period after knowing police were attempting a stop supported a conviction.
Cole v. State — Indiana courts have held that a person may not flee from police after an order to stop, even if the legality of the initial stop is questionable.
Lashley v. State — a citizen is not permitted to flee from an officer’s show of authority merely because the citizen believes the order is unlawful.
Dandridge v. State — even where the initial police encounter is questionable, flight after an order to stop may create a lawful basis for arrest.
Bovie v. State — where undercover officers lacked authority to make the stop and no legal duty to stop existed, the conviction was reversed.
Arthur v. State — fleeing first in a vehicle and then on foot may be one continuous act for double jeopardy purposes.
State v. Czobakowsky — the mere approach of a uniformed officer, without lights, sirens, or a clear order to stop, is not automatically an order to stop.
Fowler v. State — an order to stop can sometimes be visual rather than verbal depending on the circumstances.
Wellman v. State — walking away and locking a door after being told not to leave can qualify as flight.
Yowler v. State — Indiana has not recognized “outrageous conduct” by police as a defense to fleeing from an order to stop.
State v. Moriarity — the modern rule discouraging resistance to peaceful police action can apply to seizure of property.
Spears v. State — visual commands may sometimes be inferred from the circumstances, though the State still must prove an order to stop.

Vehicle Flight and Felony Resisting Law Enforcement

Resisting law enforcement becomes much more serious when the allegation involves a vehicle. Fleeing in a vehicle can elevate the charge to a Level 6 felony. If the State alleges that the driving created a substantial risk of bodily injury, caused injury, caused serious bodily injury, or caused death, the penalties can become far more severe.

Not every delayed stop is felony flight. A person may continue driving briefly because they are looking for a safe place to pull over, trying to reach a well-lit area, confused about whether the officer is stopping them, or responding to an unclear police signal. These facts can matter, especially when the State must prove knowing or intentional flight.

Penalties for Resisting Law Enforcement in Indiana

Class A misdemeanor: up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000.
Level 6 felony: commonly charged when flight involves a vehicle or certain aggravating facts are alleged.
Higher felony levels: possible where serious bodily injury, death, deadly weapons, or substantial risk allegations are involved.
Collateral consequences: probation violations, employment consequences, driver’s license issues, immigration concerns, firearm consequences, and damage to future background checks.

Common Defenses to Resisting Law Enforcement Charges

The alleged conduct was passive noncompliance, not forcible resistance.
The officer was not lawfully engaged in the execution of official duties.
The officer unlawfully entered a home.
No clear order to stop was given.
The alleged order to stop was not visible or audible.
The defendant did not know the person was a police officer.
The State cannot prove knowing or intentional conduct.
The officer’s testimony conflicts with body camera footage or other evidence.
The State cannot prove venue, date, identity, or other required elements.
Evidence should be suppressed because of unlawful police conduct.
The case is vulnerable to a Trial Rule 41(B) motion after the State rests.

Examples of Resisting Law Enforcement and Related Cases

I have won many resisting law enforcement and related cases by carefully attacking the State’s evidence, using suppression motions, cross-examining officers, and making Trial Rule 41(B) motions when the State fails to prove its case.

Resisting by flight / operating without a license: In one case, my client was accused of fleeing after an officer observed mismatched plates. The officer claimed my client slowed down, changed lanes, sped up, and eventually stopped several blocks later. At trial, the officer could not properly authenticate the probable cause affidavit because he had dictated it but had not personally typed or signed it. Because the State could not prove the “on or about” date requirement, my client was found not guilty on both counts.
Two counts of resisting law enforcement and public intoxication: I obtained a win through a Trial Rule 41(B) motion after the State failed to present sufficient evidence.
Disorderly conduct: I obtained a dismissal on a Trial Rule 41(B) motion after the State forgot to prove venue.
Public intoxication involving private property: I won cases where police moved a person from a private porch or private property into a public place and then tried to charge public intoxication.
Criminal trespass involving police authority: I won after challenging whether police had actual or apparent authority from the property owner to trespass my client.
Public nudity: I obtained a not guilty verdict after arguing the client was not in a public place when police came to his door.
Possession and handgun cases tied to police encounters: I have won cases involving unlawful searches, improper inventory searches, Crawford/hearsay issues, Miranda issues, and constructive possession arguments.
Battery case: I obtained a not guilty verdict where the State failed to prove intent after a door accidentally struck the alleged victim.

Why These Cases Are Often Winnable

Resisting law enforcement cases are often winnable because officers sometimes use broad language that does not match the statute. A police report may say a person “resisted,” but the legal question is much more specific. Did the person forcibly resist? Did the person knowingly flee? Was there a clear order to stop? Was the officer lawfully engaged in official duties? Was the officer inside the home unlawfully? Did the defendant know the person was an officer? Did the State actually prove the date, venue, and identity?

Those details are why experience matters. I have taught this subject, litigated these issues repeatedly, and tried these cases in real courtrooms. I know how these cases are charged, how prosecutors try to prove them, and where the weaknesses usually appear.

Frequently Asked Questions About Resisting Law Enforcement in Indiana

Is resisting law enforcement the same as resisting arrest?

People often call it resisting arrest, but Indiana law uses the term resisting law enforcement. The charge can involve arrests, traffic stops, investigations, service of process, court orders, and police commands to stop.

Can I be convicted for arguing with police?

Argument alone is usually not enough. The State must prove the statutory elements. For a force case, that means proving forcible resistance, obstruction, or interference. For a flight case, that means proving flight after a visible or audible order to stop.

Can pulling away from an officer be resisting law enforcement?

Sometimes. But pulling away does not automatically prove resisting by force. Courts look at the amount of force, the context, the officer’s actions, and whether the State can prove forcible resistance beyond a reasonable doubt.

Can walking away from police be resisting law enforcement?

Walking away can sometimes be charged as resisting by flight if the officer clearly identified himself or herself and ordered the person to stop. However, if no clear order was given, or if the person did not know police were ordering them to stop, the case may be defensible.

Is fleeing in a vehicle a felony in Indiana?

Often yes. Vehicle flight is commonly charged as a felony. The seriousness of the charge can increase if prosecutors allege dangerous driving, substantial risk, injury, serious bodily injury, or death.

Can police enter my home to arrest me?

Not always. Indiana cases recognize important constitutional limits on warrantless police entry into a home. Simply opening the door to speak with police is not always consent to enter.

Can resisting law enforcement charges be beaten?

Yes. I have won resisting law enforcement cases through not guilty verdicts, Trial Rule 41(B) motions, suppression issues, and careful cross-examination of officers.

Contact Jeff Cardella for a Free Consultation

If you have additional questions, call me for a free consultation to discuss your case.

Phone: 317-695-7700

Email: jeffcardella@cardellalawoffice.com

Address: 350 Massachusetts Ave #357, Indianapolis, IN 46204

Counties We Serve

I handle criminal defense cases throughout the entire State of Indiana, with a focus on the following locations:

DISCLAIMER - The information contained on this website is provided for educational and informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice or as an offer to perform legal services on any subject matter. The content of this website contains general information and may not reflect current legal developments or information. The information is not guaranteed to be correct, complete, or current. We make no warranty, expressed, or implied, about the accuracy or reliability of the information at this website or at any other website to which it is linked. Recipients of content from this site should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information included in the site without seeking appropriate legal advice on the particular facts and circumstances at issue from an Indiana Criminal Defense attorney or attorney licensed in the recipient’s state. Nothing herein is intended to create an attorney-client relationship and shall not be construed as legal advice. This is not an offer to represent you, nor is it intended to create an attorney-client relationship.

Table of Contents