Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 35-33-2-3 (2026)

Issuance; service or arrests; forcible entry; wrongful entry, recovery of damages

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

     Sec. 3. (a) The warrant is issued to the sheriff of the county where the indictment or information is filed. This warrant may be served or arrests on it made:

(1) by any law enforcement officer;

(2) on any day of the week; and

(3) at any time of the day or night.

     (b) A law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if the officer is not admitted following an announcement of the officer's authority and purpose.

     (c) The accused person shall be delivered to the sheriff of the county in which the indictment or information was filed, and the sheriff shall commit the accused person to jail or hold the accused person to bail as provided in this article.

     (d) A person or persons whose property is wrongfully damaged or whose person is wrongfully injured by any law enforcement officer or officers who wrongfully enter may recover such damage from the responsible authority and the law enforcement officer or officers as the court may determine. The action may be filed in the circuit court or superior court in the county where the wrongful entry took place.

As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.2. Amended by Acts 1982, P.L.204, SEC.8; P.L.320-1983, SEC.4; P.L.201-2011, SEC.110.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1994–2019 · leading case: City of Anderson v. Weatherford, 714 N.E.2d 181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
City of Anderson v. Weatherford, 714 N.E.2d 181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 3× “CODE § 35-33-2-3(a). Weatherford counters, arguing that the Tort Claims Act does not apply to all conduct of law enforcement officers, that "the Act is clear on its face that immunity will only apply if the Defendants were acting within the scope of their employment" and that…”
State v. Estep, 753 N.E.2d 22 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “Code § 35-33-2-3(b) provides that "[a] law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if he is not admitted following an announcement of his authority and purpose." (Emphasis added.) We find that the existence of a…”
Floyd Weddle v. State of Indiana, 989 N.E.2d 371 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “2001); Ind.Code § 35-33-2-3(b). Thereafter, protective sweeps may be conducted, which our Supreme Court has observed as follows: [A]s an incident to the arrest the officers could, as a precautionary matter and without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, look in closets and…”
William P. Stickrod v. State of Indiana, 108 N.E.3d 385 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “" Ind. Code § 35-33-2-3 (2011). [13] In Duran v.”
Maravilla v. United States, 867 F. Supp. 1363 (N.D. Ind. 1994). · cites it 2× “1985); Ind. Code Ann. § 35-33-2-3 (b) (West 1986).”
Smith v. Farley, 873 F. Supp. 1199 (N.D. Ind. 1994). · cites it 2× “The petitioner then maintains that Ohrberg was not acting in the course of his duty because he failed to following-, the specific details of a knock and announce statute in IC § 35-33-2-3(b). This proposition rests on the fact that “the police witnesses testified that Ohrberg…”
Larry K. Croucher II v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 4× “” Ind. Code § 35-33-2-3 (b). Here, Officer Mansfield announced through the cracked door that he was serving an arrest warrant on Lamb.”
Cedric S. Ware v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “denied; see also, I.C. § 35-33-2-3(b) (providing that a “law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if he is not admitted following an announcement of his authority and purpose”).”
Robert McAnalley v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “The statute provides as follows: (b) A law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if the officer is not admitted following an announcement of the officer’s authority and purpose.”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-2-3(a) — 1 case
City of Anderson v. Weatherford, 714 N.E.2d 181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). “CODE § 35-33-2-3(a). Weatherford counters, arguing that the Tort Claims Act does not apply to all conduct of law enforcement officers, that "the Act is clear on its face that immunity will only apply if the Defendants were acting within the scope of their employment" and that…”
— Ind. Code § 35-33-2-3(b) — 5 cases
State v. Estep, 753 N.E.2d 22 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “Code § 35-33-2-3(b) provides that "[a] law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if he is not admitted following an announcement of his authority and purpose." (Emphasis added.) We find that the existence of a…”
Floyd Weddle v. State of Indiana, 989 N.E.2d 371 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “2001); Ind.Code § 35-33-2-3(b). Thereafter, protective sweeps may be conducted, which our Supreme Court has observed as follows: [A]s an incident to the arrest the officers could, as a precautionary matter and without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, look in closets and…”
Smith v. Farley, 873 F. Supp. 1199 (N.D. Ind. 1994). “The petitioner then maintains that Ohrberg was not acting in the course of his duty because he failed to following-, the specific details of a knock and announce statute in IC § 35-33-2-3(b). This proposition rests on the fact that “the police witnesses testified that Ohrberg…”
Cedric S. Ware v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “denied; see also, I.C. § 35-33-2-3(b) (providing that a “law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if he is not admitted following an announcement of his authority and purpose”).”
Robert McAnalley v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “The statute provides as follows: (b) A law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute an arrest warrant, if the officer is not admitted following an announcement of the officer’s authority and purpose.”
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.