Sec. 5. (a) A subpoena duces tecum or subpoena ad
testificandum summoning a witness to appear before the grand jury
shall be issued by the clerk upon the request of the grand jury or
prosecuting attorney. The subpoena must contain a statement of the
general nature of the grand jury inquiry.
(b) If the subpoena is issued to a target, the subpoena shall also
contain a statement informing the target that:
(1) he is a subject of the grand jury investigation;
(2) he has the right to consult with an attorney and to be assisted
by an attorney under section 13 of this chapter; and
(3) if he cannot afford an attorney, the court inpaneling the grand
jury will appoint one for him, upon request.
(c) If a witness fails to appear at the time and place stated in the
subpoena, the court may hold him in contempt of court, unless he had
filed a motion to quash the subpoena and the motion has been granted
or was pending at the time he was to have appeared.
As added by Acts 1981, P.L.298, SEC.3. Amended by
P.L.320-1983, SEC.15; P.L.170-1984, SEC.2.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2024 · leading case:
Oman v. State, 737 N.E.2d 1131 (Ind. 2000).
Oman v. State, 737 N.E.2d 1131 (Ind. 2000).
· cites it 8× “A grand jury derives its investigative power from a different statute, the language of which does not evince a legislative intent for direct court involvement during the pre-charge, investigative stage: "A subpoena duces tecum or subpoena ad testificandum summoning a witness to…”
Loren Hamilton Fry v. State of Indiana, 990 N.E.2d 429 (Ind. 2013).
· cites it 2× “Ind. Code §§ 35-34-2-5 .5 (target of grand jury may be subpoenaed, in which case he may be represented by counsel, but counsel may not address grand jurors or prosecutor, object, argue, question any person, or participate in any way), -9 (target shall be given right to testify…”
Wurster v. State, 715 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 1999).
“§ 35-34-2-5(a). If the grand jury subpoenas a witness, one would expect that grand jurors, rather than the prosecutor, would be much better suited to ask questions directly rather than through the filter of a prosecutor who saw no need to subpoena the witness.”
Kelli Anderson v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 2× “See I.C. § 35-34-2-5(a) (“A subpoena duces tecum or subpoena ad Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-CR-2609 | September 4, 2024 Page 6 of 11 testificandum summoning a witness to appear before the grand jury shall be issued by the clerk upon the request of the .”
— Ind. Code § 35-34-2-5(a) — 4 cases
Oman v. State, 737 N.E.2d 1131 (Ind. 2000).
“A grand jury derives its investigative power from a different statute, the language of which does not evince a legislative intent for direct court involvement during the pre-charge, investigative stage: "A subpoena duces tecum or subpoena ad testificandum summoning a witness to…”
Wurster v. State, 715 N.E.2d 341 (Ind. 1999).
“§ 35-34-2-5(a). If the grand jury subpoenas a witness, one would expect that grand jurors, rather than the prosecutor, would be much better suited to ask questions directly rather than through the filter of a prosecutor who saw no need to subpoena the witness.”
Kelli Anderson v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2024).
“See I.C. § 35-34-2-5(a) (“A subpoena duces tecum or subpoena ad Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-CR-2609 | September 4, 2024 Page 6 of 11 testificandum summoning a witness to appear before the grand jury shall be issued by the clerk upon the request of the .”
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.