Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 35-34-2-10 (2026)
Unauthorized disclosure of grand jury information; offense; production of transcript
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 10. (a) Except when required to do so by law, a person who has been present at a grand jury proceeding and who knowingly or intentionally discloses:
(1) any evidence or testimony given or produced;
(2) what a grand juror said; or
(3) the vote of any grand juror;
to any other person, except to a person who was also present or entitled to be present at that proceeding or to the prosecuting attorney or his representative, commits unauthorized disclosure of grand jury information, a Class B misdemeanor.
(b) The transcript of testimony of a witness before a grand jury may be produced only:
(1) for the official use of the prosecuting attorney; or
(2) upon order of:
(A) the court which impaneled the grand jury;
(B) the court trying a case upon an indictment of the grand jury; or
(C) a court trying a prosecution for perjury;
but only after a showing of particularized need for the transcript.
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.3. Amended by P.L.312-1985, SEC.4.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1989–2020 · leading case: Davis v. Carmel Clay Schs., 282 F.R.D. 201 (S.D. Ind. 2012).
Davis v. Carmel Clay Schs., 282 F.R.D. 201 (S.D. Ind. 2012). “These include grand jury transcripts and proceedings (Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10), reports of child abuse and neglect (Ind.”
Hinojosa v. State, 781 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. 2003). “The history of Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10 indicates that the Legislature intended this provision to limit the acceptable use of grand jury transcripts from a previously more lenient standard.”
Joyner v. State, 678 N.E.2d 386 (Ind. 1997). “Indiana Code Section 35-34-2-10 provides that the court which impanels the grand jury may order disclosure of grand jury transcripts upon a showing of particularized need.”
Wurster v. State, 715 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 1999). “Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10(b) (1998). In Marion County transcripts of the “testimony of persons who the prosecuting attorney intends to call as witnesses at the hearing or trial” must be disclosed to a defendant in the normal course of automatic discovery.”
Howell v. State, 859 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10(a); Hinojosa, 781 N.”
Long v. Durnil, 697 N.E.2d 100 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). “Long further asks us to reverse the trial court because Durnil violated Ind.Code 35-34-2-10 which provides in pertinent part as follows: (a) Except when required to do so by law, a person who has been present at a grand jury proceeding and who knowingly or intentionally…”
State v. Heltzel, 533 N.E.2d 159 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989). “CODE § 35-34-2-10 (1987 Supp.): "(a) Except when required to do so by law, a person who has been present at a grand jury proceeding and who knowingly or intentionally discloses: (1) any evidence or testimony given or produced; (2) what a grand juror said; or (3) the vote of any…”
State v. Heltzel, 535 N.E.2d 1221 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989). “588 N.E. 2d 159 . The contempt complaint did not relate to the publication of information.”
Hinojosa v. State, 752 N.E.2d 107 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “In enacting I.C. § 35-34-2-10(b), the legislature has unambiguously created an exception to the general rule preserving the secrecy of grand jury transcripts.”
Phillip M. Geans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). “State law provides: (b) The transcript of testimony of a witness before a grand jury may be produced only: (1) for the official use of the prosecuting attorney; or 4 Although the State raised Hinojosa in the trial court, it inexplicably failed to mention either Hinojosa or…”
Daniel Brewington v. Dearborn Superior Court II, Judge Sally McLaughlin, Judge Brian Hill, Court Reporter Barbara Ruwe (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2020). “Ind. Code § 35-34-2-10 (a); Hinojosa, 781 N.”
James A. Wurster, Samuel R. Turpin, Willis R. Conner v. State of Indiana (Ind. 1999). “Code § 35-34-2-10(b) (1998). In Marion County transcripts of the “testimony of persons who the prosecuting attorney intends to call as witnesses at the hearing or trial” must be disclosed to a defendant in the normal course of automatic discovery.”
— Ind. Code § 35-34-2-10(a) — 2 cases
Davis v. Carmel Clay Schs., 282 F.R.D. 201 (S.D. Ind. 2012). “These include grand jury transcripts and proceedings (Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10), reports of child abuse and neglect (Ind.”
Howell v. State, 859 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10(a); Hinojosa, 781 N.”
— Ind. Code § 35-34-2-10(b) — 9 cases
Hinojosa v. State, 781 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. 2003). “The history of Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10 indicates that the Legislature intended this provision to limit the acceptable use of grand jury transcripts from a previously more lenient standard.”
Wurster v. State, 715 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 1999). “Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10(b) (1998). In Marion County transcripts of the “testimony of persons who the prosecuting attorney intends to call as witnesses at the hearing or trial” must be disclosed to a defendant in the normal course of automatic discovery.”
Davis v. Carmel Clay Schs., 282 F.R.D. 201 (S.D. Ind. 2012). “These include grand jury transcripts and proceedings (Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10), reports of child abuse and neglect (Ind.”
Howell v. State, 859 N.E.2d 677 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10(a); Hinojosa, 781 N.”
State v. Heltzel, 535 N.E.2d 1221 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989). “588 N.E. 2d 159 . The contempt complaint did not relate to the publication of information.”
— Ind. Code § 35-34-2-10(b)(2)(A) — 2 cases
Davis v. Carmel Clay Schs., 282 F.R.D. 201 (S.D. Ind. 2012). “These include grand jury transcripts and proceedings (Ind.Code § 35-34-2-10), reports of child abuse and neglect (Ind.”
Hinojosa v. State, 752 N.E.2d 107 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “In enacting I.C. § 35-34-2-10(b), the legislature has unambiguously created an exception to the general rule preserving the secrecy of grand jury transcripts.”
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.