HB1122 creates a new criminal offense in Indiana called “unlawful encroachment on a law enforcement officer.” The bill authorizes a law enforcement officer who is lawfully performing official duties to order a person to stop approaching if the officer reasonably believes the person’s presence within 25 feet would interfere with those duties. If a person knowingly or intentionally continues to approach within that 25-foot zone after being ordered to stop, the person commits the offense.
The bill is narrowly focused on officer safety and scene control during law enforcement activity. It does not broadly regulate public conduct near police in all settings; instead, it applies only when an officer is actively engaged in official duties and has made the required warning based on a reasonable belief of interference. The offense is classified as a Class C misdemeanor, making it a relatively low-level criminal penalty under Indiana law.
Impact
HB1122 amends the Indiana Code by adding a new section to the criminal law and procedure chapter, creating a specific misdemeanor offense tied to proximity to police officers. It gives law enforcement officers explicit statutory authority to direct individuals to stop approaching within 25 feet under specified circumstances, and it exposes violators to criminal liability. The practical effect is to expand police authority to establish a buffer zone around themselves while performing duties and to provide prosecutors with a new charge for noncompliance.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable support in both chambers, passing the House 70-19 and the Senate 39-10. Those vote totals suggest broad, though not unanimous, agreement that the measure addresses officer safety and operational interference. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the floor votes indicate the bill was viewed positively overall.
Contention
The likely point of contention is the balance between officer safety and public access or expressive activity near police encounters. Supporters would view the 25-foot buffer and compliance requirement as a practical tool to prevent interference and protect officers, while opponents may worry that the standard is broad or subjective because it turns on the officer’s reasonable belief that a person’s presence will interfere. Another possible concern is whether the law could be used to restrict bystanders, observers, or protest activity near police operations.