Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 31-32-4-2 (2026)
Court appointment of counsel to represent child
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 2. (a) If:
(1) a child alleged to be a delinquent child does not have an attorney who may represent the child without a conflict of interest; and
(2) the child has not lawfully waived the child's right to counsel under IC 31-32-5 (or IC 31-6-7-3 before its repeal);
the juvenile court shall appoint counsel for the child at the detention hearing or at the initial hearing, whichever occurs first, or at any earlier time.
(b) The court may appoint counsel to represent any child in any other proceeding.
[Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-6-7-2(a).]
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.15.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2017–2025 · leading case: J.W. v. State of Indiana, 113 N.E.3d 1202 (Ind. 2019).
J.W. v. State of Indiana, 113 N.E.3d 1202 (Ind. 2019). “§ 31-32-4-2(b). We hold that the statutory right to counsel extends to the Tumulty -type post-judgment proceedings contemplated here under Trial Rule 60(B), in which a juvenile asserts one or more claims premised on the allegation that his consent judgment was obtained…”
State of Indiana v. C.K., 70 N.E.3d 900 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “Code section 31-32-4-2 *904 (1997) (failed to appoint counsel in a timely manner); (2) Ind.”
K. v. Marion Cnty., Indiana (S.D. Ind. 2020). “They seek declaratory and injunctive relief, including: (1) a declaration that Ind. Code § 31-32-4-2 (b) is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to Plaintiffs; (2) a declaration that Defendants have unconstitutionally caused Plaintiffs to have no attorney representation…”
CHINS: J S v. Indiana Dep't of Child Servs. (Ind. 2025). “I.C. § 31-32-4-2(b); see also Katherine Meger Kelsey, A Child’s Right to Counsel: The Case for Indiana to Craft Its Own Framework, 9 Ind.”
— Ind. Code § 31-32-4-2(b) — 2 cases
J.W. v. State of Indiana, 113 N.E.3d 1202 (Ind. 2019). “§ 31-32-4-2(b). We hold that the statutory right to counsel extends to the Tumulty -type post-judgment proceedings contemplated here under Trial Rule 60(B), in which a juvenile asserts one or more claims premised on the allegation that his consent judgment was obtained…”
CHINS: J S v. Indiana Dep't of Child Servs. (Ind. 2025). “I.C. § 31-32-4-2(b); see also Katherine Meger Kelsey, A Child’s Right to Counsel: The Case for Indiana to Craft Its Own Framework, 9 Ind.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.