Shoultz v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that person’s conviction for making unreasonable noise based on loud speaking during police investigation constituted state action restricting defendant’s expressive activity
• holding that a law enforcement officer who used unconstitutionally excessive force was no longer lawfully engaged in the execution of his-duty and reversing the defendant’s conviction' for resisting law enforcement
• holding that a law enforcement officer who used unconstitutionally excessive force was no longer lawfully engaged in the execution of his duty and reversing the defendant’s conviction for resisting law enforcement
• providing that the recorded established that the State restricted Dallaly’s expressive activity where he was arrested for disorderly conduct after he screamed and swore at officers
• officer’s force was excessive where defendant posed no immediate threat and officer struck defendant on the head and leg with a thick metal flashlight
• “The general rule in Indiana is that ‘a private citizen may not use force in resisting a peaceful arrest by an individual who he knows, or has reason to know, is a police officer performing his duties regardless of whether the arrest in question is lawful or unlawful.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).