Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8 (2026)
Repealed
✓ current as of May 2026
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.103. Repealed by Acts 1980, P.L.115, SEC.5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 88
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Wright v. State, 658 N.E.2d 563 (Ind. 1995).
Wright v. State, 658 N.E.2d 563 (Ind. 1995). “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-8 (1998). Thus, when the Compton court said that the trial court properly refused the requested instruction on Criminal Conversion because of the way the State had drafted the information, it said that the State may foreclose an instruction on an inherently…”
Louis Bell v. State of Indiana, 81 N.E.3d 233 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “5 Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8 .3 (2015). 6 We held oral argument on this matter on March 2, 2017, at the Lafayette campus of Ivy Tech Community College.”
Jacob Lee Silvers v. State of Indiana, 114 N.E.3d 931 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “140; see also Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8 .3(b)(1). Silvers asserts that "there is no evidence he used a straw *937 or spoon to ingest a controlled substance.”
N. Elec. Co., Inc. v. Torma, 819 N.E.2d 417 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “§ 35-48-4-8, while the record establishes every element of the claim.”
State of Indiana v. Nicolas Lindauer, 105 N.E.3d 211 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “4 Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8 .3(b)(1) (2015). 5 Ind.”
Harlan Bakeries, Inc. v. Muncy, 835 N.E.2d 1018 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). “" I.C. § 35-48-4-8. "To exert control over property" is defined by statute as "to obtain, take, carry, drive, lead away, conceal, abandon, sell, convey, encumber, or possess property or to secure, transfer, or extend a right to property.”
Dorsey v. State, 490 N.E.2d 260 (Ind. 1986). “) and two counts of conversion, a class A misdemeanor, Ind.Code § 35-48-4-8 (Burns 1985 Repl.). Defendant-appellant, Reginald J.”
Sam & Mac, Inc. v. Treat, 783 N.E.2d 760 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 35-48-4-8 requires proof that unauthorized control was executed over property in which another person has ownership or possessor rights.”
Inlow v. Inlow, 797 N.E.2d 810 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “Conversion Next, the Inlow Children argue that Anita's retention of the entire $18 million distribution constitutes conversion pursuant to IC. § 35-48-4-8, and that they are entitled to damages under the Indiana Crime Victims Relief Act (I.”
State v. Gibson, 886 N.E.2d 639 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-8. 4 . We also note the court explicitly found "Officer Taylor arrived on the scene as Officer Kipper was writing the Defendant a ticket.”
Kevin Speer v. State of Indiana, 995 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). “Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8 .3(a). The State presented evidence pipes used to smoke methamphetamine were found under Speer’s seat in the vehicle.”
White v. Indiana Realty Assocs. II, 555 N.E.2d 454 (Ind. 1990). “Indiana Realty claimed a pecuniary loss from White's alleged conversion, Ind.Code § 35-48-4-8 (West 1986), criminal tres pass, Ind.”
— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8(a) — 2 cases
Storey v. Leonas, 904 N.E.2d 229 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
M.Q.M. v. State, 840 N.E.2d 441 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006).
— Ind. Code § 35-48-4-8(a)(1) — 1 case
Alarcon v. State, 573 N.E.2d 477 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991).
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.