Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6 (2026)

Repealed

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

As added by P.L.298-1995, SEC.1. Amended by P.L.88-2002, SEC.1; P.L.85-2004, SEC.53; P.L.178-2007, SEC.3; P.L.131-2009, SEC.74; P.L.77-2012, SEC.62. Repealed by P.L.158-2013, SEC.429.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1997–2014 · leading case: Nash v. State, 881 N.E.2d 1060 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
Nash v. State, 881 N.E.2d 1060 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 8× “Indiana Code Section 35-42-2-6(a) defines a “corrections officer” to include persons employed by (1) the department of correction; *1063 (2) a law enforcement agency; (3) a probation department; (4) a county jail; or (5) a circuit, superior, county, probate, city, or town court.”
Henson v. State, 786 N.E.2d 274 (Ind. 2003). · cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6(c) ("A person who knowingly or intentionally in a rude, insolent, or angry manner places blood or another body fluid or waste on a law enforcement officer or corrections officer identified as such and while engaged in the performance of official duties .”
Warr v. State, 877 N.E.2d 817 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6(c) (2004). Warr also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s findings that she was in direct criminal contempt of court.”
Haggard v. State, 771 N.E.2d 668 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “See Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6 (1998). 3 . See Ind.”
Thomas v. State, 749 N.E.2d 1231 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 8× “1 He raises two issues on appeal: first, whether the trial court erred by admitting hearsay testimony of one deputy who testified that another deputy said Thomas spit on him, and second, whether the legislature intended Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6 to apply to situations where no…”
Henson v. State, 798 N.E.2d 540 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6. 2 . Zeabart was, at that time, a correctional officer at Wabash Valley.”
Baker v. State, 768 N.E.2d 477 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6 (Burns Code Ed. Repl.”
Newman v. State, 677 N.E.2d 590 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). “Ind.Code 35-42-2-6(c). 2 . Ind.Code 35-45-4-2.”
Jerry D. Boyce v. State of Indiana, No. 16A01-1210-CR-453 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2013). · cites it 6× “ISSUE Boyce raises one issue on appeal, which we restate as: Whether the State presented sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Boyce had the requisite mens rea to commit the charges.”
Matthew D. Tribble v. State of Indiana, No. 79A02-1404-CR-290 (Ind. Ct. App. Dec. 23, 2014). · cites it 4× “) 2 I.C. § 35-42-2-6. This statute is now repealed and Indiana Code Section 35-42-2-1(b)(2) describes battery by means of placing any bodily fluid or waste on another person.”
Kevin J. Mamon v. State of Indiana, No. 30A05-1309-CR-440 (Ind. Ct. App. Mar. 31, 2014). · cites it 2× “1 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6 (c). 2 Sometime during the evening of November 20, 2012, an inmate worker reported that Mamon spit on him.”
George Small v. State of Indiana, No. 49A05-1304-CR-179 (Ind. Ct. App. Oct. 31, 2013). · cites it 2× “identified as such and while engaged in the performance of official duties .”
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6(a): 1 case
Nash v. State, 881 N.E.2d 1060 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Indiana Code Section 35-42-2-6(a) defines a “corrections officer” to include persons employed by (1) the department of correction; *1063 (2) a law enforcement agency; (3) a probation department; (4) a county jail; or (5) a circuit, superior, county, probate, city, or town court.”
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6(c): 3 cases
Henson v. State, 786 N.E.2d 274 (Ind. 2003). “See Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6(c) ("A person who knowingly or intentionally in a rude, insolent, or angry manner places blood or another body fluid or waste on a law enforcement officer or corrections officer identified as such and while engaged in the performance of official duties .”
Warr v. State, 877 N.E.2d 817 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “See Ind.Code § 35-42-2-6(c) (2004). Warr also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s findings that she was in direct criminal contempt of court.”
Newman v. State, 677 N.E.2d 590 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997). “Ind.Code 35-42-2-6(c). 2 . Ind.Code 35-45-4-2.”
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6(e): 2 cases
Nash v. State, 881 N.E.2d 1060 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Indiana Code Section 35-42-2-6(a) defines a “corrections officer” to include persons employed by (1) the department of correction; *1063 (2) a law enforcement agency; (3) a probation department; (4) a county jail; or (5) a circuit, superior, county, probate, city, or town court.”
Jerry D. Boyce v. State of Indiana, No. 16A01-1210-CR-453 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 30, 2013). “ISSUE Boyce raises one issue on appeal, which we restate as: Whether the State presented sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Boyce had the requisite mens rea to commit the charges.”
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-6(e)(l): 1 case
Nash v. State, 881 N.E.2d 1060 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Indiana Code Section 35-42-2-6(a) defines a “corrections officer” to include persons employed by (1) the department of correction; *1063 (2) a law enforcement agency; (3) a probation department; (4) a county jail; or (5) a circuit, superior, county, probate, city, or town court.”
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.