Case Law & Resources: Indiana
Citation
Issue Presented & Facts
Thompson v. City of Indianapolis, S.D. Ind. 2016, 208 F. Supp. 3d 968
Backseat passengers who were severely injured when officers fired 11 rounds into backseat of vehicle during a traffic stop brought action against city and officers, alleging violation of the Fourth Amendment, as well as state law claims of excessive force, assault, and battery. Officers filed motion for summary judgment.
​
During a traffic stop, officers attempted to make an arrest, drew their weapons and told the passengers to raise their hands. When an officer believed one of the individuals had a gun and was "raising his hands" that officer shot six times and a second officer shot into the vehicle five times.
​
In its analysis of the Indiana statute, the court noted that the statute essentially tracks the reasonableness standard under the 4th Amendment.
Holding
General issue of material fact as to whether reasonable force was used precluding summary judgment in favor of the officers.
​
Reference to Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-41-3-3.
O'Bannon v. City of Anderson , App. 2000, 733 N.E.2d 1
Whether officers use of force was reasonable where the officer fired into a home, entered the home without a warrant, and momentarily detained the homeowner when in pursuit of another individual who had already attempted to fatally injure police officers that evening.
In pursuit of an individual who had already fired upon police officers in the course of their pursuit, the police fired shots into the home of a third person, searched her home and breifly detained her. The suspect had entered that home without permission.
Officer's use of force was objectively reasonable.
​
Reference to Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-41-3-3
Johnson v. Scott, C.A.7 (Ind.) 2009, 576. F.3d 658
Whether officer's use of force under 35-41-3-3- was reasonable where the pursuing officer's canine bit the suspect just after he had appeared to surrender.
​
After fleeing from officers in a vehicle and on foot, the suspect put his hands in the air after encountering a fence too high for him to jump over and said “I give up” a second or less before the pursuing officer and his dog arrived, resulting in the suspect being bitten and struck; given that two serious crimes were at issue, that officer reasonably believed suspect might be armed, and that suspect had clearly been attempting to evade arrest, officer was not required to take suspect's apparent surrender at face value a split second after it occurred and could reasonably think that use of the dog was necessary to avoid giving suspect the time he might have needed to retrieve and use a weapon.
Officer's use of force, including his police dog, to subdue suspect was objectively reasonable
​
Reference to Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure § 35-41-3-3.
Case Law
Resources
Citation
Summary and Notes
Interesting article on potential legislative priorities related to use of force. Potential legislative solutions include additional implementation of body cameras, background checks for officers, and a database for civilian complaints against officers.
Relevant Excerpt
N/A
Article outlining IMPD's use-of-force policy updates, which include: (1) Updated identification and warning requirements, (2) banning of choke holds, (3) de-escalation requirements, and (4) prohibiting firing from or into moving vehicles.
N/A
Text of IMDP's use of force policy, including the updates noted above as well as new reporting guidelines and rules on less than lethal devices.
N/A
Proposed legislation that would require mandatory training in de-escalation as part of the use-of-force curriculum for police officers and prohibits the use of chokeholds under certain circumstances.
N/A