Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1 (2025)
"Dangerous"
✓ 2025 Indiana Code: the 2026 session is not included
Sec. 1. (a) For the purposes of this chapter, an individual is "dangerous" if:
(1) the individual presents an imminent risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual; or
(2) It is probable that the individual will present a risk of personal injury to the individual or to another individual in the future and the individual:
(A) has a mental illness (as defined in IC 12-7-2-130) that may be controlled by medication, and has not demonstrated a pattern of voluntarily and consistently taking the individual's medication while not under supervision; or
(B) is the subject of documented evidence that would give rise to a reasonable belief that the individual has a propensity for violent or suicidal conduct.
(b) The fact that an individual has been released from a mental health facility or has a mental illness that is currently controlled by medication does not establish that the individual is dangerous for the purposes of this chapter.
As added by P.L.1-2006, SEC.537. Amended by P.L.289-2019, SEC.6.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2024 · leading case: Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1 In late July 2012, Redington, who lives in Indianapolis, approached Devon Moore, a Bloomington parking enforcement officer in a Bloomington parking garage and began telling him that he has a gun range and that he found a person dead behind the range…”
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 121 N.E.3d 1053 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “[10] A majority of this court affirmed the trial court's order with regard to the sufficiency of the evidence: Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that evidence of probative value exists from which the court could have determined that Redington was dangerous as…”
Robert Wilder v. State of Indiana, 91 N.E.3d 1016 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “Rational Basis Review [29] The firearm law at issue in Redington was Indiana Code Section 35-47-14-1, et seq. , which authorized the State to seize, pursuant to a warrant, firearms of a person who the State proved by clear and convincing evidence met the statutory definition of…”
James T. Morgan v. State of Indiana, 228 N.E.3d 512 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024). “Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1 (2019). [21] We focus our analysis on subsection (a)(2) of the statute.”
Schenke v. Lehman, No. 4:18-cv-00079 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 9, 2020). “Furthermore, Indiana’s “red flag” law permits a warrantless seizure of firearms where a law enforcement officer believes that an individual is dangerous, as defined by Indiana Code § 35-47-14-1. See Ind. Code § 35-47-14-3 (eff.”
Rebolledo v. Eden, 12 F. Supp. 3d 1125 (S.D. Ind. 2014). “” Ind.Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2)(A) (emphasis added).”
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(1): 3 cases
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1 In late July 2012, Redington, who lives in Indianapolis, approached Devon Moore, a Bloomington parking enforcement officer in a Bloomington parking garage and began telling him that he has a gun range and that he found a person dead behind the range…”
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 121 N.E.3d 1053 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “[10] A majority of this court affirmed the trial court's order with regard to the sufficiency of the evidence: Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that evidence of probative value exists from which the court could have determined that Redington was dangerous as…”
James T. Morgan v. State of Indiana, 228 N.E.3d 512 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024). “Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1 (2019). [21] We focus our analysis on subsection (a)(2) of the statute.”
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2): 2 cases
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1 In late July 2012, Redington, who lives in Indianapolis, approached Devon Moore, a Bloomington parking enforcement officer in a Bloomington parking garage and began telling him that he has a gun range and that he found a person dead behind the range…”
James T. Morgan v. State of Indiana, 228 N.E.3d 512 (Ind. Ct. App. 2024). “Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1 (2019). [21] We focus our analysis on subsection (a)(2) of the statute.”
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2)(A): 2 cases
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 121 N.E.3d 1053 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “[10] A majority of this court affirmed the trial court's order with regard to the sufficiency of the evidence: Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that evidence of probative value exists from which the court could have determined that Redington was dangerous as…”
Rebolledo v. Eden, 12 F. Supp. 3d 1125 (S.D. Ind. 2014). “” Ind.Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2)(A) (emphasis added).”
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2)(B): 2 cases
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 121 N.E.3d 1053 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). “[10] A majority of this court affirmed the trial court's order with regard to the sufficiency of the evidence: Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that evidence of probative value exists from which the court could have determined that Redington was dangerous as…”
Robert E. Redington v. State of Indiana, 992 N.E.2d 823 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1 In late July 2012, Redington, who lives in Indianapolis, approached Devon Moore, a Bloomington parking enforcement officer in a Bloomington parking garage and began telling him that he has a gun range and that he found a person dead behind the range…”
Ind. Code § 35-47-14-1(b): 1 case
Rebolledo v. Eden, 12 F. Supp. 3d 1125 (S.D. Ind. 2014). “” Ind.Code § 35-47-14-1(a)(2)(A) (emphasis added).”
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.