Demetrius Walker v. State of Indiana
984 N.E.2d 642
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Walker was convicted of resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, and the State filed a joint information with a second count for disorderly conduct.
- The incident occurred around 12:25 a.m. on March 25, 2012, during a fight at an Indianapolis intersection involving Walker and Cory Finch before officers intervened.
- Officer Ehret commanded them to stay apart and lie on the ground; both men ignored and advanced toward each other, leading to physical altercations.
- Finch threw a punch; Walker retaliated with additional blows; after repeated orders to stop, Walker approached the officer with clenched fists and aggressive stance.
- The officer warned of a taser; upon Walker’s proximity (three to four feet), the officer tased Walker, who then submitted and was handcuffed.
- A bench trial occurred on April 18, 2012; Count II (disorderly conduct) was dismissed, Count I (resisting law enforcement) was found guilty, and Walker was sentenced to 90 days in jail.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for forcible resistance | Walker disobeyed commands but did not physically resist. | State proved forcible resistance by Walker’s strength and threat of violence toward the officer. | Evidence sufficient to prove forcible resistance beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Key Cases Cited
- Spangler v. State, 607 N.E.2d 720 (Ind. 1993) (defined forcible resistance as strong, violent means to evade duties)
- Johnson v. State, 833 N.E.2d 516 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (moderate force may suffice; not required to be violent per se)
- Graham v. State, 903 N.E.2d 963 (Ind. 2009) (force need not meet common- parlance ‘violent’ standard)
- A.C. v. State, 929 N.E.2d 907 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (passive inaction is insufficient for forcible resistance)
- Colvin v. State, 916 N.E.2d 306 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (refusal to remove hands from pockets not forcible resistance)
- Braster v. State, 596 N.E.2d 278 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992) (passive resistance concepts discussed in context of statutory force)
- Pogue v. State, 937 N.E.2d 1253 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (strength and threat of violence can prove forcible resistance)
- Stansberry v. State, 954 N.E.2d 507 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (reversed conviction where trial court found no forcible resistance, following Pogue)
- Vanderlinden v. State, 918 N.E.2d 642 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (sufficiency review standard for resisting law enforcement)