History
  • No items yet
midpage
Dereck D. Hendricks v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A04-1510-CR-1558
| Ind. Ct. App. | Jul 25, 2016
Read the full case

Background

  • At ~3:30 a.m. Jackson called 911 reporting Hendricks had attempted to choke her; she left the house and stayed at a nearby relative’s home. She told the operator she intended to return and did not request an ambulance.
  • Officers Thalheimer and Olmos went to the North Gale Street residence. Hendricks answered the door, refused officers entry, and told them to leave.
  • Jackson returned, unlocked the door from outside, pointed at Hendricks, and opened the door for officers; Hendricks continued to refuse to come outside.
  • Officers entered the home to arrest Hendricks without a warrant; a struggle ensued, officers tased and handcuffed him.
  • Hendricks was convicted at bench trial of two counts of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement and appealed, arguing the officers were not lawfully executing their duties when they entered his home.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument (State) Defendant's Argument (Hendricks) Held
Whether officers were lawfully executing duties when Hendricks resisted Officers had authority to enter over objection to address alleged domestic violence and effect an arrest Officers entered without warrant or exigent circumstances; Hendricks had a right to resist unlawful entry The officers were not lawfully executing duties when they entered; conviction reversed

Key Cases Cited

  • Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006) (present co-occupant’s refusal prevents warrantless entry based on another co-occupant’s consent)
  • Harper v. State, 3 N.E.3d 1080 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (warrantless in-home arrest requires probable cause plus exigent circumstances)
  • Barnes v. State, 953 N.E.2d 473 (Ind. 2011) (discussed in relation to Castle Doctrine legislative response)
  • Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003 (Ind. 2009) (standard for sufficiency-of-the-evidence review)
  • Adkisson v. State, 728 N.E.2d 175 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (forcible entry to arrest without exigency is unlawful)
  • Cupello v. State, 27 N.E.3d 1122 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (Castle Doctrine and related entry/force issues)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Dereck D. Hendricks v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
Court Name: Indiana Court of Appeals
Date Published: Jul 25, 2016
Docket Number: 49A04-1510-CR-1558
Court Abbreviation: Ind. Ct. App.