Sec. 2. (a) The state public defender shall represent a
person who is:
(1) confined in a penal facility in Indiana or committed to the
department of correction due to a criminal conviction or
delinquency adjudication; and
(2) financially unable to employ counsel;
in a postconviction proceeding testing the legality of the person's
conviction, commitment, or confinement, if the time for appeal has
expired.
(b) The state public defender shall also represent a person who is
committed to the department of correction due to a criminal conviction
or delinquency adjudication, and who is financially unable to employ
counsel, in proceedings before the department of correction or parole
board, if the right to legal representation is established by law.
(c) This section does not require the state public defender to pursue
a claim or defense that is not warranted under law and cannot be
supported by a good faith argument for an extension, a modification,
or a reversal of law, or that for any other reason is without merit.
(d) This section does not prohibit an offender from proceeding on
the offender's own behalf or otherwise refusing the services of the state
public defender.
[Pre-2004 Recodification Citation: 33-1-7-2.]
As added by P.L.98-2004, SEC.19.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2025 · leading case:
Graves v. State, 823 N.E.2d 1193 (Ind. 2005).
Graves v. State, 823 N.E.2d 1193 (Ind. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Ind.Code Ann. § 33-40-1-2 (West 2004); 1945 Ind.”
Kortney Lee Elzey v. State of Indiana, No. 24S-CR-00436 (Ind. Nov. 20, 2025).
· cites it 15× “” Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2 (a). I agree with the Court that this statute encompasses individuals confined in county jails, meaning post- conviction petitioners in such facilities are entitled to representation by the SPD.”
Dodd v. Warden, No. 3:19-cv-00312 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 21, 2020).
“§§ 33-40-1-2; 33-40-2-2, and the proposed plea agreement indicates that the other inmate had such counsel.”
Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2(a): 1 case
Kortney Lee Elzey v. State of Indiana, No. 24S-CR-00436 (Ind. Nov. 20, 2025).
“” Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2 (a). I agree with the Court that this statute encompasses individuals confined in county jails, meaning post- conviction petitioners in such facilities are entitled to representation by the SPD.”
Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2(a)(1): 1 case
Kortney Lee Elzey v. State of Indiana, No. 24S-CR-00436 (Ind. Nov. 20, 2025).
“” Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2 (a). I agree with the Court that this statute encompasses individuals confined in county jails, meaning post- conviction petitioners in such facilities are entitled to representation by the SPD.”
Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2(c): 1 case
Kortney Lee Elzey v. State of Indiana, No. 24S-CR-00436 (Ind. Nov. 20, 2025).
“” Ind. Code § 33-40-1-2 (a). I agree with the Court that this statute encompasses individuals confined in county jails, meaning post- conviction petitioners in such facilities are entitled to representation by the SPD.”
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.