Ind. Supreme Court reaffirms, clarifies previous controversial decision

The Indiana Supreme Court has upheld and clarified a controversial ruling on resisting unlawful police entry that many state political figures condemned as too broad.

The ruling was originally decided upon in May.

In Barnes v. State, the Supreme Court ruled the common law right to resist unlawful police entry into a home, which dates back to the Magna Carta of 1215, is no longer a right in the state of Indiana.

In the case, an individual named Richard Barnes was asked to leave his home by his wife after a domestic disturbance. Once the police arrived and saw Barnes angry, they attempted to enter the house.

Barnes slammed the door in the face of the police in an attempt to prevent them from entering.

The Supreme Court affirmed his conviction for resisting arrest and battery on a police officer.

But many state leaders, including members of the Indiana General Assembly, Gov. Mitch Daniels and Attorney General Greg Zoeller, asked the court to clarify its ruling, which they viewed as too broad.

“You can go almost back to the Magna Carta and find the concept of ‘a person’s home is their castle,’” State Senate President Pro Tempore David Long said in May.

“Clearly, the Supreme Court could have narrowly tailored this decision to deal with the circumstances in this case,” Long said.  

The Court reaffirmed its earlier ruling Tuesday. The Court said citizens do have a right to resist police officers’ unlawful entry into a person’s home, but “reasonable resistance does not include battery or other violent acts against law enforcement.”

The justices supporting the reaffirmation said they did not intend their original ruling to address the constitutional issue of legal entry into a home.

“Our earlier opinion was not intended to, and did not, change that existing law about the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses and papers against unreasonable searches and seizures,” Justice Steven David said in the majority opinion.

The court ruled 4-1 to reaffirm the decision.

— Zach Ammerman