Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 35-33-1-5 (2026)

Definition

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     Sec. 5. Arrest is the taking of a person into custody, that he may be held to answer for a crime.

As added by P.L.320-1983, SEC.3.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Danielle Kelly v. State of Indiana, 997 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2013).
Danielle Kelly v. State of Indiana, 997 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2013). · cites it 2× “1996) (finding arrest when defendant was handcuffed and placed in patrol car).”
Wright v. State, 766 N.E.2d 1223 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “An arrest is defined as "the taking of a person into custody, that he may be held to answer for a crime," Ind. Code § 35-33-1-5 (1998). "An arrest occurs when `police officers interrupt the freedom of the accused and restrict his liberty of movement.”
Moffitt v. State, 817 N.E.2d 239 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “Indiana Code Section 35-33-1-5 defines an arrest as the "taking of a person into custody, that he may be held to answer for a crime.”
Johnson v. State, 766 N.E.2d 426 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “" I.C. § 35-33-1-5. Therefore, the events that took place are more appropriately addressed as an arrest, requiring probable cause, rather than as an investigatory stop, requiring only reasonable and articulable suspicion.”
Jones v. State, 655 N.E.2d 49 (Ind. 1995). · cites it 2× “" Ind.Code Ann. § 35-33-1-5 (West 1986). Custody means "[tlhe care and control of a thing or person.”
Wilson v. State, 754 N.E.2d 950 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “" An arrest has occurred when a police officer "interrupts the freedom of the accused an[d] restricts his liberty of movement.”
Gibson v. State, 733 N.E.2d 945 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Indiana Code section 35-33-1-5 defines an arrest as “taking of a person into custody, that he may be held to answer for a crime.”
Taylor v. State, 842 N.E.2d 327 (Ind. 2006). “§ 35-33-1-5 (1983). See also L.C. § 34-28-5-1 (setting forth the procedure for actions taken under this provision and declaring they "shall be conducted in accordance with the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure.”
Phillips v. State, 492 N.E.2d 10 (Ind. 1986). · cites it 2× “" Ind. Code § 35-33-1-5 (Burns 1985). An arrest has occurred when police officers "interrupt the freedom of an accused and restrict his liberty of movement.”
Carl T. Wilson v. State of Indiana, 96 N.E.3d 655 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “" Ind. Code § 35-33-1-5 . Our Indiana Supreme Court has said: "An arrest occurs when a police officer interrupts the freedom of the accused and restricts his liberty of movement.”
Stevens v. State, 701 N.E.2d 277 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “” Ind.Code § 35-33-1-5. An arrest has occurred when a police officer “interrupts the freedom of the accused an[d] restricts his liberty of movement.”
Elliott v. Sheriff of Rush Cnty., Ind., 686 F. Supp. 2d 840 (S.D. Ind. 2010). · cites it 2× “” Ind. Code § 35-33-1-5 . An investigatory stop does not constitute an arrest under the Indiana definition of arrest.”
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.