Demetrius Walker v. State of Indiana, 2013 Ind. LEXIS 969

Walker was arrested March 25, 2012 after a fight in Indianapolis; Officer Ehret observed two men arguing and commanded them to the ground.
One man dropped to the ground; Walker advanced toward Ehret with fists clenched within three to four feet.
Ehret warned to stop and lay down, then deployed a taser when Walker continued to approach aggressively.
Walker was convicted of resisting law enforcement (class A misdemeanor) and disorderly conduct (class B misdemeanor) after a bench trial.
Court of Appeals affirmed; Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and affirmed the conviction.
The court discussed the meaning of “forcibly” resisting law enforcement, emphasizing that force need not be extreme but must be more than passive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence shows forcible resistance under statute	Walker contends there was no forcible resistance.	State contends the conduct was forcible resistance.	Sufficient evidence supports forcible resistance.
Whether forcible means actual contact is required	No contact was necessary for forcible resistance.	Forcible resistance can include threats or movements without contact.	Contact not required; threats/movements can suffice.
Whether proximity and aggressive advance constitute forcible action	Walking toward an officer alone is not forcible.	Aggressive advance with clenched fists may be forcible.	Aggressive approach near the officer supports forcible resistance.

Spangler v. State, 607 N.E.2d 720 (Ind. 1993) (forcible element requires more than passive conduct)
Graham v. State, 903 N.E.2d 963 (Ind. 2009) (modest level of force may suffice)
Pogue v. State, 937 N.E.2d 1253 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (threats or display of strength can sustain conviction)
Stansberry v. State, 954 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (imminent danger or threat supports forcible resistance)
K.W. v. State, 984 N.E.2d 610 (Ind. 2013) (illustrates case-specific sufficiency for juveniles)