If you are in need of a top rated criminal defense attorney in Indiana, call me at 317-695-7700 for a free consultation. I have been a criminal attorney in Indiana for my entire legal career, have almost two decades of experience, taught criminal law at the IU McKinney School of Law, and was selected as one of the Top 100 Attorneys by the National Trial Lawyers Association.
As an expert in the field, I have also been asked to provide legal commentary on high profile media cases involving legal defenses such as self defense and the stand your ground doctrine. Below, we discuss legal defenses that are available under Indiana law.
“An affirmative defense admits all the elements of the crime but proves circumstances which excuse the defendant from culpability.” Melendez v. State, 511 N.E.2d 454, 457 (Ind. 1987).
Indiana Law recognizes several statutory legal defenses, including:
IC § 35-41-3-1 – Legal Authority
IC § 35-41-3-2 – Use of Force to Protect Person or Property
IC § 35-41-3-3 – Use of Force Relating to Arrest or Escape
IC § 35-41-3-6 – Mental Disease or Defect
IC § 35-41-3-7 – Mistake of Fact
IC § 35-41-3-11 – Mental Disease or Defect; Use of Justifiable Reasonable Force
IC § 35-41-3-12 – Defense to crime involving the death of or injury to a fetus; exceptions
IC § 35-41-3-1 – Legal Authority
IC § 35-41-3-1 refers to the legal authority defense in Indiana. This defense provides that a person’s conduct does not constitute a crime when the person acts under a reasonable belief that they were acting under legal authority. To successfully raise the defense of legal authority, the defendant must show that they had a reasonable belief that they were acting with legal authority. This means that they must have been aware of the law or contract that gave them authority to act, and they must have believed that they were acting within the scope of that authority. To successfully raise the defense of legal authority, the defendant’s reasonable belief that their conduct was lawful must be based on a reasonable interpretation of the law at the time the offense was committed. This defense is typically only available in cases where the defendant is charged with a crime that requires a specific intent or knowledge, such as fraud or embezzlement, and cannot be used for general intent crimes, such as assault or battery.
Examples of when the defense of legal authority might be used include when a police officer makes an arrest based on the reasonable belief that a crime has been committed, or a landlord who enters a tenant’s property to address a legal issue, such as a noise complaint.
IC § 35-41-3-2 – Use of Force to Protect Person or Property
IC § 35-41-3-2 governs the use of force to protect a person or property in Indiana. This is commonly referred to as the defense of Self Defense, Defense of Others, or Defense of Property. A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect themselves or a third person from what they reasonably believe to be the imminent use of unlawful force. The person using force must reasonably believe that force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to themselves or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. A person is justified in using deadly force, and does not have a duty to retreat, only if they reasonably believe that deadly force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to themselves or a third person or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. The amount of force used must be reasonable and proportional to the threat faced, and the person claiming self defense must not be the initial aggressor. The use of force to protect oneself or another is not justified when the threat consists only of verbal threats, without more. The Indiana Self-Defense Pattern Jury Instruction is:
The defense of self-defense is defined by law as follows: A person is justified in using reasonable force against another person to protect himself (or a third person) from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force. [A person is justified in using deadly force only if he reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to himself (or a third person) or the commission of a forcible felony.] [No person in this State shall be placed in legal jeopardy of any kind whatsoever for protecting himself, his family, or his property by reasonable means necessary.]
A person is not justified in using force if: he is the initial aggressor, unless he has withdrawn from the encounter and communicated his intent to do so, and the other person continues or threatens to continue unlawful action; or the person provokes unlawful action by another person with the intent to cause bodily injury to the other person; or he has entered into combat with another person or is the initial aggressor, unless he withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the other person his intent to withdraw and the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action.
The State has the burden of disproving this defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
To establish a valid self-defense claim in Indiana, four key elements must be met: 1) The defendant must be without fault, meaning they did not provoke or initiate the conflict; 2) They must be in a place where they have a legal right to be; 3) They must have a reasonable fear of bodily harm, which includes both objective (what a reasonable person would fear) and subjective (what the defendant actually feared) components; 4) The force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat. Force is not justified if the defendant is committing a crime, provoking the action, or is the initial aggressor without withdrawing.
Examples of when the defense of self defense might be used include when a person uses a weapon to defend themselves from an armed attacker, or when a person uses force to stop a home invasion.
The Castle Doctrine in Indiana
The Castle Doctrine, embedded within IC § 35-41-3-2, strengthens self-defense rights in Indiana by allowing individuals to use reasonable force, including deadly force, to protect themselves or others in their home, vehicle, or other dwelling without a duty to retreat. This doctrine is based on the principle that one’s home is their “castle,” and they have the right to defend it against unlawful intrusion. To successfully invoke the Castle Doctrine, the defendant must show they reasonably believed the intruder posed an imminent threat of unlawful force or serious harm, and that the force used was necessary and proportionate. For example, if an armed intruder breaks into your home, you may use deadly force if you reasonably fear for your life. However, the doctrine doesn’t apply if the defendant provoked the confrontation or was engaged in illegal activity. An experienced Indiana criminal defense attorney can help navigate the nuances of this defense to protect your rights.
Stand Your Ground Law in Indiana
Indiana’s Stand Your Ground law, also part of IC § 35-41-3-2, eliminates the duty to retreat in public places when a person reasonably believes they face imminent unlawful force. Enacted to empower individuals to defend themselves without fleeing, this law allows the use of reasonable force, including deadly force, if necessary to prevent serious bodily injury or death, or to stop a forcible felony. For example, if someone is threatened with a weapon in a public park, they can stand their ground and use proportionate force without retreating. However, the defendant must not have provoked the incident or been engaged in a crime directly related to the confrontation. The state bears the burden of proving the defendant’s actions were not justified. Consult a knowledgeable Indianapolis criminal lawyer to assess whether this defense applies to your case.
IC § 35-41-3-3 – Use of Force Relating to Arrest or Escape
IC § 35-41-3-3 provides that a person other than a law enforcement officer is justified in using reasonable force against another person to effect an arrest or prevent the other person’s escape if a felony has been committed and there is probable cause to believe that the other person committed the felony, provided that the amount of force used is reasonable. A person is justified in using reasonable force, but not deadly force, to prevent or terminate another person’s unlawful entry or attack on the person’s dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle. The defense is available only if the person reasonably believes that the use of force is necessary to effect the arrest or prevent the escape. The use of deadly force is governed by the conditions set forth in IC § 35-41-3-2, described above. In Indiana, law enforcement does not look favorably on a citizen’s arrest, so you should use caution if you are ever in a situation where you might need to make a citizen’s arrest.
IC § 35-41-3-5 – Intoxication
IC § 35-41-3-5 provides that it is a defense that the person who engaged in the prohibited conduct did so while he was intoxicated, only if the intoxication resulted from the introduction of a substance into his body without his consent or when he did not know that the substance might cause intoxication. Intoxication is not a defense if the person voluntarily consumed alcohol or drugs. For example, if a person is drugged without their knowledge and then commits a prohibited act, they may be able to claim this defense. The defense is only available if the person was unaware that the substance could cause intoxication. Whether the defense of intoxication can be raised depends on the specific facts of the case and the nature of the crime with which the person is charged.
This defense is limited to involuntary intoxication, such as when a drink is spiked or medication is administered without knowledge. It negates the voluntary aspect required for culpability in crimes needing intent. However, proving involuntariness is challenging, often requiring medical evidence or witness testimony. It’s commonly attempted in OWI (Operating While Intoxicated) cases but rarely succeeds if any voluntary consumption occurred.
IC § 35-41-3-6 – Mental Disease or Defect
IC § 35-41-3-6 provides the insanity defense: a person is not responsible for criminal conduct if, due to mental disease or defect, they lacked the ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of their actions at the time of the offense.
“Mental disease or defect” is defined as a severely abnormal mental condition that grossly and demonstrably impairs a person’s perception, but does not include abnormalities manifested only by repeated unlawful or antisocial conduct. Indiana follows the M’Naghten rule for insanity, focusing on cognitive impairment rather than volitional control.
The elements are: 1) The defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect at the time of the offense; 2) As a result, they were unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct. This is an affirmative defense, requiring proof by a preponderance of the evidence. Successful insanity defenses often lead to commitment for treatment rather than punishment. Expert psychiatric evaluation is essential. If mental illness may have impacted your case, seek immediate advice from an experienced Indiana criminal defense attorney.
IC § 35-41-3-7 – Mistake of Fact
IC § 35-41-3-7 establishes the mistake of fact defense in Indiana. This defense applies when a person reasonably mistakes a matter of fact, and that mistake negates the culpability (mental state) required for the offense. The mistake must be honest and reasonable under the circumstances, and it must directly undermine an element of the crime, such as intent or knowledge.
For the defense to succeed, the mistake must negate the mens rea (guilty mind) of the crime. It is not available for strict liability offenses. Examples include mistakenly taking someone else’s identical bag at an airport, believing it to be your own (negating intent for theft), or acting under a reasonable belief that one has permission to enter a property. This defense is particularly useful in cases involving specific intent crimes. An experienced Indiana criminal defense attorney can evaluate whether a mistake of fact applies to your situation and help present evidence to support it.
IC § 35-41-3-8 – Duress
IC § 35-41-3-8 provides the duress defense in Indiana. A person is not criminally responsible if they engaged in prohibited conduct because they were compelled by threat of imminent serious bodily injury to themselves or another person. For non-felony offenses, compulsion by force or threat of force can also apply.
The elements include: 1) Compulsion by an imminent threat of serious bodily injury (for felonies) or force/threat of force (for misdemeanors); 2) The pressure must be such that a person of reasonable firmness could not resist; 3) The defendant did not recklessly place themselves in the situation. Duress is unavailable for crimes against persons, like murder or battery. Examples include being forced at gunpoint to drive getaway for a robbery or smuggling drugs under family threats. Navigating duress requires careful analysis of the threats and alternatives available; consult a skilled Indianapolis criminal defense lawyer to determine if this defense fits your case.
IC § 35-41-3-9 – Entrapment
IC § 35-41-3-9 defines the entrapment defense in Indiana. It applies when the prohibited conduct was induced by a law enforcement officer or their agent using persuasion or other means likely to cause the person to commit the offense, and the person was not predisposed to engage in such conduct.
Merely providing an opportunity to commit the crime does not constitute entrapment. The defense focuses on whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime independent of police inducement. Once raised, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that no entrapment occurred or that the defendant was predisposed. This defense is common in undercover operations, such as drug stings, where excessive inducement is alleged. An experienced criminal attorney can review police conduct to assess if entrapment provides a strong defense in your matter.
IC § 35-41-3-10 – Abandonment
IC § 35-41-3-10 allows the abandonment defense for certain inchoate (incomplete) crimes, such as attempt, conspiracy, or aiding under IC 35-41-5-1, IC 35-41-5-2, or charges involving accomplice liability.
The defense requires that the person voluntarily abandoned their effort to commit the underlying crime and voluntarily prevented its commission. This shows a complete and voluntary renunciation of criminal purpose, not motivated by fear of detection or increased difficulty. For example, if someone backs out of a planned robbery and stops others from proceeding, abandonment may apply. This defense can reduce or eliminate liability; discuss with a knowledgeable Indiana criminal defense attorney if your actions qualify.
IC § 35-41-3-11 – Mental Disease or Defect; Use of Justifiable Reasonable Force
IC § 35-41-3-11 addresses situations where a person with a mental disease or defect uses force that would otherwise be justifiable under self-defense laws (IC § 35-41-3-2). Even if insanity prevents full acquittal under IC § 35-41-3-6, this section allows consideration of whether the force used was reasonably believed necessary due to the person’s condition.
Expert testimony is often required and must comply with Indiana Rules of Evidence. This nuanced defense bridges insanity and justification claims. If mental health issues played a role in your case, an expert Indianapolis criminal lawyer can help explore this and related defenses.
IC § 35-41-3-12 – Defense to Crime Involving the Death of or Injury to a Fetus
IC § 35-41-3-12 provides a specific defense for certain individuals charged with crimes that involve the death of or injury to a fetus, such as feticide, murder of a fetus, or battery resulting in fetal harm.
The defense applies primarily to the pregnant woman herself, protecting her from prosecution for actions that result in the termination or injury of her own pregnancy. It also extends to physicians or others performing lawful medical procedures at the request of the pregnant woman. Exceptions exist where the conduct falls outside legal medical practices or involves intentional unlawful acts not covered by the defense.
This provision ensures that pregnant women are not criminalized for pregnancy outcomes or for seeking lawful reproductive health care, while still allowing prosecution of third parties who unlawfully cause harm to a fetus.
Necessity
Although not codified in IC § 35-41-3, Indiana recognizes the common law defense of necessity. This applies when a person commits a prohibited act to avoid a greater harm, where the harm avoided is greater than the harm caused, the necessity is imminent, and no reasonable legal alternative exists.
To prevail on a necessity defense, the defendant must show: 1) The act was done to prevent a significant evil; 2) There was no adequate alternative; 3) The harm caused was not disproportionate to the harm avoided; 4) The defendant had a good-faith belief that the act was necessary; 5) This belief was objectively reasonable; 6) The defendant did not substantially contribute to the emergency. Examples include breaking into a building to escape a life-threatening situation or minor traffic violations to avoid immediate danger. The defendant must not have created the necessity. Necessity is a rare but powerful justification defense; contact a seasoned criminal defense attorney to evaluate its applicability to your circumstances.
Contact My Office for a Free Consultation
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
I handle cases throughout all of Indiana, including the Federal District Courts and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. The main geographic areas that I practice law in are:
- Indianapolis, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Noblesville, Carmel & Fishers, Hamilton County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Danville, Plainfield & Avon, Hendricks County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Franklin & Greenwood, Johnson County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Muncie, Delaware County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Anderson, Madison County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Lebanon & Zionsville, Boone County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Shelbyville, Shelby County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)
- Martinsville, Mooresville & Morgantown, Morgan County, Indiana (for both Criminal Defense and Expungement)