Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Resisting Law Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill amending resisting statutes; amendments raise penalties, head to appropriations
Summary
The committee amended a resisting statute bill to increase penalties for resisting with a vehicle and create a higher penalty tier for moderate bodily injury; the committee approved the amendments and sent the amended bill to appropriations after a 7-1 vote on the amendment package.
The Senate Committee on Corrections and Criminal Law advanced a bill addressing resisting law enforcement and related penalties, approving two substantive amendments and directing the amended bill to the Appropriations Committee.
A sponsor said the bill seeks to strengthen penalties for individuals who flee or resist law enforcement in ways that create substantial danger to officers and the public. The sponsor framed the change as a response to recent incidents involving vehicle pursuits and cited the need for stiffer consequences in cases that lead to serious harm.
Amendment 3, described by the sponsor, increases the level for resisting using a vehicle from a level 6 felony to a level 5 felony to match language in another bill (Senate Bill 324). Amendment 4 narrows the bodily-injury enhancement by creating a separate —1moderate bodily injury—1 category that would elevate resisting-forced-injury to a level 5 felony, with the sponsor saying the change was intended to distinguish minor harms ("a bent back thumb") from more serious injuries.
Committee members questioned the scope of the proposed "moderate bodily injury" standard and expressed concern the language could be broad and unevenly applied across counties. Senator Pohl explained in his recorded vote statement that the moderate-bodily-injury elevation to a level 5 felony was a —1bridge too far,—1 citing uncertainty about how different judges or counties might interpret the term.
Mike Biberstein of the Indiana Sheriffs9Association testified in support. After discussion the committee took a roll call on the amended bill; the record shows the amendment vote passed 7 to 1 and the committee directed the bill to appropriations.
The committee also noted LSA (Legislative Services Agency) would resolve technical overlap in amendment language before second reading.
No public testimony opposed the bill; the committee's recorded action was to approve the amendments and send the amended bill to appropriations for a fiscal review.
