Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry. “We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

The court’s decision stems from a Vanderburgh County case in which police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment.

When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him. Professor Ivan Bodensteiner, of Valparaiso University School of Law, said the court’s decision is consistent with the idea of preventing violence. Justice Robert Rucker, a Gary native, and Justice Brent Dickson, a Hobart native, dissented from the ruling, saying the court’s decision runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Every day, it gets a little worse.




  1. Publius says:

    Reform the US Justice System.

    Surf to Senator James Webb of Virginia’s web page.

    Capture the URL, and copy to clipboard memory.

    Then google for your own senators’ contact web pages and ask them to support Webb’s reform program.

    Most Seriously.

    Lay them off. Do it before you wish you had.

  2. Publius says:

    #30, your comments deserve some explanation.

    go ahead, explain.

  3. Kunta Kinte says:

    You waited too long, slaves.

  4. John E. Quantum says:

    This incident illustrates how necessary the use of split second good judgement is in the day to day work of law enforcement. Good judgement starts with good people and they are often in short supply. Even good people can make bad decisions, just as bad people can make good decisions. The toughest desisions a law enforcement officer has to make, as well as the greatest danger they face often involve domestic violence situations.

  5. nauc says:

    I only open my door to friends and family. Anyone else, get lost, or my guns pointed at you. I will not live on my knees.

  6. Uncle Patso says:

    The way this story is written implies that any law enforcement officer may enter any home in Indiana for any reason, or for no reason at all, and no one may resist in any way. Indiana politics can get very, very dirty, and this just adds a lot of possibilities to the bag of dirty tricks available. It doesn’t require much imagination to come up with numerous nightmare scenarios.

    Just a couple, off the top of my head:

    * The home of someone running for sheriff being constantly “visited” by the incumbent’s deputies.

    * Or anyone running against any incumbent unable to sleep because of constant such “visits” day and night.

    * House-to-house sweeps looking for (fill in the blank) — illegals, drug paraphernalia, weapons, subversive literature, cash, or just whatever they can find. Maybe nothing they find would stand up in court, but just think of all the people they could tase and arrest for resisting!

  7. BertDawg says:

    If ‘we, the people’ are going to retain any of the right granted us in the Bill of Rights, we need to get rid of judges like that without hesitation. If we sit back and let shit like that go unanswered, we deserve the dregs.

  8. The_Tick says:

    It sure looks from a albeit short distance, that, the US is slipping alarmingly fast into a police state. Canada has always had a “guilty until proven innocent” thing going on and the US system of rights was one of the few things I envied about the US. Maybe it just seems worse than it is, illegal wiretaps, tsa shakedowns and such, but it would be a shame to see your finest achievement go for shit.

  9. Monsieur Meloche says:

    C’mon folks. The cops wanted to hear from the wife that she was alright. The angry husband’s “word” should not suffice.
    Shoving a cop gets you arrested whether in your house or not.
    If the cops go through the trouble of ditching their doughnuts to go investigate a domestic disturbance, let them investigate. Because if the cops leave when the husband says “everything is fine, go away”, and the wife is already dead or dies 20 mins later, they’ll have some s’plaining to do.

  10. BillyBob says:

    Pure stupidity. This will last until the first police officer looses his life because a homeowner gets scared and shoots or someones daughter gets raped because the homeowner assumed it was the police breaking into his home. A big can of worms only lawyers could love. This judge needs to be removed and jailed; what part of our Constitution is unclear to him?

  11. jlt28 says:

    If anyone comes through my door, I will do just what my father, the FBI Special Agent taught me to do. “Shoot first, ask questions later.”

  12. Norman Speight says:

    All villains should put their hands together.
    You describe this as ‘unlawful’ entry. Fair do’s.
    In my ignorance I presume this to mean ‘against the law’ (or is there another meaning?)
    Also, any evidence or goods seized are improperly (in law) taken, therefore also – presumably – inadmissible.
    I’m also interested in two other matters:
    Where did this judge qualify (presumably Indiana – ‘nuf said) and secondly
    What is he drinking or smoking, seems to be good stuff to me.

  13. bobbo, PUKES aren't the only ones lying all the time says:

    What a bunch of retards.

    If “someone” is breaking into your house, you can shoot them (sic) but if you actually “know” they are the police, then shooting them is illegal (sic).

    sic = conditions apply.

    Idiots. You don’t deserve a Bill of Rights.

  14. kane says:

    The information obtained from illegal entry should be inadmissible. Still, assault on a police officer is assault period.

  15. bobbo, words have a meaning and a context says:

    I thought the following was the final decision but it rules on a different case. Rats. Looks like I will have to read VERY carefully to see what words they are defining. Ain’t it a bitch when you can’t (shouldn’t) just read anything you want to any which way you want to?

    http://supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1272.pdf

    Have to read again, maybe a third time.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4173 access attempts in the last 7 days.