Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1 (2026)
Class C misdemeanor; defense
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 1. (a) A person who operates a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent to at least eight-hundredths (0.08) gram of alcohol but less than fifteen-hundredths (0.15) gram of alcohol per:
(1) one hundred (100) milliliters of the person's blood; or
(2) two hundred ten (210) liters of the person's breath;
commits a Class C misdemeanor.
(b) A person who operates a vehicle with an alcohol concentration equivalent to at least fifteen-hundredths (0.15) gram of alcohol per:
(1) one hundred (100) milliliters of the person's blood; or
(2) two hundred ten (210) liters of the person's breath;
commits a Class A misdemeanor.
(c) A person who operates a vehicle with a controlled substance listed in schedule I or II of IC 35-48-2 or its metabolite in the person's blood commits a Class C misdemeanor.
(d) It is a defense to subsection (c) that:
(1) the accused person consumed the controlled substance in accordance with a valid prescription or order of a practitioner (as defined in IC 35-48-1.1) who acted in the course of the practitioner's professional practice; or
(2) the:
(A) controlled substance is marijuana or a metabolite of marijuana;
(B) person was not intoxicated;
(C) person did not cause a traffic accident; and
(D) substance was identified by means of a chemical test taken pursuant to IC 9-30-7.
[Pre-1991 Recodification Citation: 9-11-2-1.]
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.18. Amended by P.L.33-1997, SEC.7; P.L.266-1999, SEC.2; P.L.1-2000, SEC.6; P.L.1-2000, SEC.7; P.L.175-2001, SEC.5; P.L.63-2018, SEC.1; P.L.142-2020, SEC.8; P.L.49-2021, SEC.1; P.L.186-2025, SEC.85.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 256
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: Larry D. Bass v. State of Indiana, 75 N.E.3d 1100 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).
Larry D. Bass v. State of Indiana, 75 N.E.3d 1100 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1 (c). The legislature also created a statutory defense to this version of OWI: “It is a defense to subsection (c) that the accused person consumed the controlled substance under a valid prescription or order of a practitioner (as defined in IC 35-48-1) who…”
Shepler v. State, 758 N.E.2d 966 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “whether Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.”
Sales v. State, 714 N.E.2d 1121 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). “Whether the trial court erred when it dismissed sua sponte the charge against Sales based on the breath-alcohol provision in Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On January 10, 1998, Delphi Police Officer Paul Vondrasek stopped Mark Sales when he failed to…”
State v. Akins, 795 N.E.2d 1093 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “[4] I believe that the language of the statute requires that we analyze whether the elements of Akins's previous Michigan conviction are substantially similar to the elements of a crime described in Ind.”
Joanna S. Robinson v. State of Indiana, 5 N.E.3d 362 (Ind. 2014). “5 Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1 (a)(2) (2010). 3 the white fog line.”
Abney v. State, 766 N.E.2d 1175 (Ind. 2002). “" Section 9-30-5-5 states that a person who violates section 9-30-5-1 commits a Class C felony "if the crime results in the death of another person.”
Chad Thomas Burnell v. State of Indiana, 110 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “5 I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a) and I.C. § 9-30-5-3(a)(1).”
Beldon v. State, 926 N.E.2d 480 (Ind. 2010). “Indiana Code section 9-380-5-3 provides that "a person who violates [I.C. § 9-30-5-1 or L.C. § 9-30-5-2] commits a Class D felony if .”
State v. Isaacs, 794 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1(c) only eriminalizes the operation of a vehicle while one has a schedule I or II controlled substance in one's body.”
State v. Rans, 739 N.E.2d 164 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). “CODE §§ 9-30-5-1 and 2. A person is intoxicated for purposes of the Indiana OWI statute if he or she is "under the influence of .”
Frensemeier v. State, 849 N.E.2d 157 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). “See Ind.Code § 9-30-5-1. Moreover, the motor vehicle accident in this case resulted in injuries to both drivers.”
State v. Straub, 749 N.E.2d 593 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). “[2] Ind.Code § 9-30-5-1. [3] Ind.Code § 9-30-5-3.”
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(A): 1 case
David E. Arnold v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(a): 43 cases
Abney v. State, 766 N.E.2d 1175 (Ind. 2002). “" Section 9-30-5-5 states that a person who violates section 9-30-5-1 commits a Class C felony "if the crime results in the death of another person.”
Alfonso Artigas v. State of Indiana, 122 N.E.3d 1003 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019).
Hopper v. State, 957 N.E.2d 613 (Ind. 2011).
Dorsett v. State, 921 N.E.2d 529 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010).
Chad Thomas Burnell v. State of Indiana, 110 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “5 I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a) and I.C. § 9-30-5-3(a)(1).”
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(a)(1): 5 cases
Chad Thomas Burnell v. State of Indiana, 110 N.E.3d 1167 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018). “5 I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a) and I.C. § 9-30-5-3(a)(1).”
Sales v. State, 714 N.E.2d 1121 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). “Whether the trial court erred when it dismissed sua sponte the charge against Sales based on the breath-alcohol provision in Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On January 10, 1998, Delphi Police Officer Paul Vondrasek stopped Mark Sales when he failed to…”
Hancock v. State, 720 N.E.2d 1241 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
Sales v. State, 715 N.E.2d 1009 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
Bradley A. Bible v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(a)(2): 6 cases
Sales v. State, 714 N.E.2d 1121 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999). “Whether the trial court erred when it dismissed sua sponte the charge against Sales based on the breath-alcohol provision in Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On January 10, 1998, Delphi Police Officer Paul Vondrasek stopped Mark Sales when he failed to…”
Napier v. State, 820 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
Hancock v. State, 720 N.E.2d 1241 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
Bolden v. State, 736 N.E.2d 1260 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
David A. Kinder v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(b): 36 cases
Brown v. State, 744 N.E.2d 989 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Glass, 769 N.E.2d 639 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002).
Rembusch v. State, 836 N.E.2d 979 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Eichholtz, 752 N.E.2d 163 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).
Barber v. State, 911 N.E.2d 641 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(b)(1): 1 case
Pamela Marlow v. Better Bars, Inc., 45 N.E.3d 1266 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(b)(1)(2): 1 case
Renicka Hoskins v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2015).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(b)(2): 1 case
Eric A. Bail v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2016).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(c): 7 cases
State v. Isaacs, 794 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1(c) only eriminalizes the operation of a vehicle while one has a schedule I or II controlled substance in one's body.”
Larry D. Bass v. State of Indiana, 75 N.E.3d 1100 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1 (c). The legislature also created a statutory defense to this version of OWI: “It is a defense to subsection (c) that the accused person consumed the controlled substance under a valid prescription or order of a practitioner (as defined in IC 35-48-1) who…”
Radick v. State, 863 N.E.2d 356 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Victor Gersdorff v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).
Stephanie J. Reagan v. State of Indiana (Ind. Ct. App. 2020).
Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1(d): 3 cases
Larry D. Bass v. State of Indiana, 75 N.E.3d 1100 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “Ind. Code § 9-30-5-1 (c). The legislature also created a statutory defense to this version of OWI: “It is a defense to subsection (c) that the accused person consumed the controlled substance under a valid prescription or order of a practitioner (as defined in IC 35-48-1) who…”
State v. Isaacs, 794 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). “Indiana Code Section 9-30-5-1(c) only eriminalizes the operation of a vehicle while one has a schedule I or II controlled substance in one's body.”
Jones Ex Rel. Jones v. Pillow Express Delivery, Inc., 908 N.E.2d 1211 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009).
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.