Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2 (2026)

Dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance or controlled substance analog

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 2. (a) A person who:

(1) knowingly or intentionally:

(A) manufactures;

(B) finances the manufacture of;

(D) finances the delivery of;

a controlled substance or controlled substance analog, pure or adulterated, classified in schedule I, except marijuana, hash oil, hashish, or salvia, or a controlled substance, or controlled substance analog, pure or adulterated, classified in schedule II or III; or

(2) possesses, with intent to:

(A) manufacture;

(B) finance the manufacture of;

(D) finance the delivery of;

commits dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance, a Level 6 felony, except as provided in subsections (b) through (f).

(b) A person may be convicted of an offense under subsection (a)(2) only if:

(1) there is evidence in addition to the weight of the drug that the person intended to manufacture, finance the manufacture of, deliver, or finance the delivery of the drug; or

(2) the amount of the drug involved is at least twenty-eight (28) grams.

(1) the amount of the drug involved is at least one (1) gram but less than five (5) grams; or

(2) the amount of the drug involved is less than one (1) gram and an enhancing circumstance applies.

(d) The offense is a Level 4 felony if:

(1) the amount of the drug involved is at least five (5) grams but less than ten (10) grams; or

(2) the amount of the drug involved is at least one (1) gram but less than five (5) grams and an enhancing circumstance applies.

(e) The offense is a Level 3 felony if:

(1) the amount of the drug involved is at least ten (10) grams but less than twenty-eight (28) grams; or

(2) the amount of the drug involved is at least five (5) grams but less than ten (10) grams and an enhancing circumstance applies.

(f) The offense is a Level 2 felony if:

(1) the amount of the drug involved is at least twenty-eight (28) grams; or

(2) the amount of the drug involved is at least ten (10) grams but less than twenty-eight (28) grams and an enhancing circumstance applies.

As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.97; Acts 1979, P.L.303, SEC.9; P.L.296-1987, SEC.6; P.L.165-1990, SEC.4; P.L.296-1995, SEC.4; P.L.65-1996, SEC.12; P.L.17-2001, SEC.20; P.L.138-2011, SEC.13; P.L.182-2011, SEC.13; P.L.158-2013, SEC.624; P.L.168-2014, SEC.93; P.L.226-2014(ts), SEC.8; P.L.44-2016, SEC.4; P.L.80-2019, SEC.23; P.L.61-2020, SEC.9.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 245 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: Brian M. Marley v. State of Indiana, 17 N.E.3d 335 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Brian M. Marley v. State of Indiana, 17 N.E.3d 335 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 10× “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2(a) (2013). 4 Under the new version of the dealing statute, which became effective July 1, 2014, dealing in a Schedule I, II, or III controlled substance is a Level 6 felony, with a sentencing range of six months to two and one-half years.”

Lehman v. State, 926 N.E.2d 35 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 8× “Code § 35-48-4-1; Count II, dealing in a schedule I, II, or III controlled substance, a Class A felony, I.C. § 35-48-4-2; and his adjudication as an habitual substance offender, I.”

Dawson v. State, 786 N.E.2d 742 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 8× “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2 states that anyone who knowingly or intentionally manufactures a controlled substance which is classified in schedule I, II, or III commits dealing in a controlled substance.”

Dennis Johnson, Raymond Johnson v. State of Indiana, 36 N.E.3d 1130 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 8× “See I.C. §§ 35-48-4-2(a); 35-50-2-5 (2013). However, the same offense on or after July 1, 2014 is now classified as a Level 6 felony, subject to a significantly lower sentencing range of six months to two and one-half years.”

Poe v. State, 775 N.E.2d 681 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 14× “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2(a) (1998). At that same time, Indiana Code section 35-48-1-18 defined manufacturing as: (1) The production, preparation, propagation, compounding, conversion, or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly by extraction from…”

Iddings v. State, 772 N.E.2d 1006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “Indiana Code Section 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(A) provides that a person who knowingly or intentionally manufactures a schedule II controlled substance, which includes methamphetamine, commits dealing in a schedule II controlled substance, a Class B felony.”

Moore v. State, 869 N.E.2d 489 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 8× “Moore (Moore), appeals his conviction for Count I, dealing in a controlled substance (methamphetamine), a Class B felony, Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2; Count II, possession of anhydrous ammonia, a Class D felony, I.”

Lay v. State, 659 N.E.2d 1005 (Ind. 1995). · cites it 10× “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2 provides in part: (a) A person who: (1) knowingly or intentionally: .”

Hatcher v. State, 762 N.E.2d 170 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 8× “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1) provides that a person is guilty of dealing in a schedule II controlled substance if he knowingly or intentionally manufactures methamphetamine.”

Conner v. State, 626 N.E.2d 803 (Ind. 1993). · cites it 6× “Ind. Code Ann. §§ 35-48-4-2 (a)(1) and (2) (West Supp.”

Hyche v. State, 934 N.E.2d 1176 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2, discussed infra. 4 .”

Oliver v. State, 843 N.E.2d 581 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “See Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2. In the present case, the record reveals that the State read the charging information to Petitioner, who indicated that he understood it and that he understood that by pleading guilty he was admitting the truth of the allegations in the charging…”

Show all 245 citing cases →

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(1) — 8 cases

Hudson v. State, 443 N.E.2d 834 (Ind. 1983).

Thorne v. State, 429 N.E.2d 644 (Ind. 1981).

Grogg v. State, 417 N.E.2d 1175 (Ind. Ct. App. 1981).

Jones v. State, 425 N.E.2d 82 (Ind. 1981).

McCann v. State, 446 N.E.2d 1293 (Ind. 1983).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(2) — 4 cases

Everroad v. State, 570 N.E.2d 38 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991).

Warthan v. State, 440 N.E.2d 657 (Ind. 1982).

Haller v. State, 454 N.E.2d 76 (Ind. Ct. App. 1983).

State v. Nix, 833 N.E.2d 541 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(5) — 1 case

State of Indiana v. James Parrott, 69 N.E.3d 535 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(A) — 1 case

Jordan v. State, 787 N.E.2d 993 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a) — 33 cases

Dennis Johnson, Raymond Johnson v. State of Indiana, 36 N.E.3d 1130 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “See I.C. §§ 35-48-4-2(a); 35-50-2-5 (2013). However, the same offense on or after July 1, 2014 is now classified as a Level 6 felony, subject to a significantly lower sentencing range of six months to two and one-half years.”

Poe v. State, 775 N.E.2d 681 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2(a) (1998). At that same time, Indiana Code section 35-48-1-18 defined manufacturing as: (1) The production, preparation, propagation, compounding, conversion, or processing of a controlled substance, either directly or indirectly by extraction from…”

Brian M. Marley v. State of Indiana, 17 N.E.3d 335 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2(a) (2013). 4 Under the new version of the dealing statute, which became effective July 1, 2014, dealing in a Schedule I, II, or III controlled substance is a Level 6 felony, with a sentencing range of six months to two and one-half years.”

Lay v. State, 659 N.E.2d 1005 (Ind. 1995). “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2 provides in part: (a) A person who: (1) knowingly or intentionally: .”

Wright v. State, 658 N.E.2d 563 (Ind. 1995).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1) — 9 cases

Hatcher v. State, 762 N.E.2d 170 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1) provides that a person is guilty of dealing in a schedule II controlled substance if he knowingly or intentionally manufactures methamphetamine.”

Creekmore v. State, 800 N.E.2d 230 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).

Field v. State, 843 N.E.2d 1008 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).

Hellums v. State, 758 N.E.2d 1027 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).

Bigler v. State, 602 N.E.2d 509 (Ind. Ct. App. 1992).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(8) — 1 case

Eaton v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1287 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(A) — 5 cases

Iddings v. State, 772 N.E.2d 1006 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). “Indiana Code Section 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(A) provides that a person who knowingly or intentionally manufactures a schedule II controlled substance, which includes methamphetamine, commits dealing in a schedule II controlled substance, a Class B felony.”

Bush v. State, 772 N.E.2d 1020 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

Dawson v. State, 786 N.E.2d 742 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “Indiana Code § 35-48-4-2 states that anyone who knowingly or intentionally manufactures a controlled substance which is classified in schedule I, II, or III commits dealing in a controlled substance.”

Eaton v. State, 825 N.E.2d 1287 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).

Goffinet v. State, 775 N.E.2d 1227 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(C) — 5 cases

Hyche v. State, 934 N.E.2d 1176 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-2, discussed infra. 4 .”

Jarod G. Allred v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

Matthew McKinney v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

Ryan M. Burton v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).

Tammie D. Wasson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(1)(c) — 1 case

Jennifer Duff v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(2) — 2 cases

Sullivan v. State, 748 N.E.2d 861 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).

Tory D. Ward v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2016).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(2)(C) — 4 cases

VanWinkle v. State, 764 N.E.2d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

Livermore v. State, 777 N.E.2d 1154 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

Leitch v. State, 736 N.E.2d 1284 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).

Mark Anthony Freeman v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2025).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(l) — 2 cases

Conner v. State, 626 N.E.2d 803 (Ind. 1993). “Ind. Code Ann. §§ 35-48-4-2 (a)(1) and (2) (West Supp.”

Gatzimos v. Garrett, 431 F. App'x 497 (7th Cir. 2011).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(l)(A) — 1 case

Goffinet v. State, 775 N.E.2d 1227 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(a)(l)(C) — 1 case

James E. Mefford v. State of Indiana, 983 N.E.2d 232 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(b) — 7 cases

Fortson v. State, 919 N.E.2d 1136 (Ind. 2010).

Murphy v. State, 499 N.E.2d 1077 (Ind. 1986).

Cowan v. State, 783 N.E.2d 1270 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).

Andre Graham v. State of Indiana, 971 N.E.2d 713 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(b)(2) — 2 cases

Seeley v. State, 936 N.E.2d 863 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010).

Jennifer L. Buchanan v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(b)(2)(B)(iii) — 1 case

James E. Pugh v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(c) — 1 case

— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-2(f)(1) — 2 cases

Mark A. Eason, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2019).

Mark Anthony Freeman v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2025).

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.