Not a terrible problem: Indiana has both a VERY strong *Official Misconduct* statute that makes illegal or unconstitutional activity by a poublic servant a felony, but also a provision for the removal from office of an elected official- to include a sheriff- who fails to perform the duties of his office, to include overlooking felony conduct by another public official.
Even better: A repeat of the same illegal act of Official Misconduct qualifies as a *Racketeering offense* under the Indiana state RICO statute, and governmental entities can be determined to be Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations just like any other criminal gang in a state court action that ANY affected Indiana resident can file. And, happily, the Indiana-based Citizens for Accountability in Government has helped citizenjs with such acts before.
IC 35-44-1-2
Official misconduct
35-44-1-2 Sec. 2. A public servant who: (1) knowingly or intentionally performs an act that the public servant is forbidden by law to perform;
(2) performs an act the public servant is not authorized by law to perform, with intent to obtain any property for himself or herself;
(3) knowingly or intentionally solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept from an appointee or employee any property other than what the public servant is authorized by law to accept as a condition of continued employment;
(4) knowingly or intentionally acquires or divests himself or herself of a pecuniary interest in any property, transaction, or enterprise or aids another person to do so based on information obtained by virtue of the public servant's office that official action that has not been made public is contemplated;
(5) knowingly or intentionally fails to deliver public records and property in the public servant's custody to the public servant's successor in office when that successor qualifies; or
(6) knowingly or intentionally violates IC 36-6-4-17(b);
commits official misconduct, a Class D felony.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.4. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.54; Acts 1980, P.L.73, SEC.2; P.L.34-1992, SEC.2;
IC 35-45-6-1
Definitions
Note: This version of section amended by P.L.173-2006, SEC.53. See also preceding version of this section amended by P.L.151-2006, SEC.17.
35-45-6-1 Sec. 1. As used in this chapter:
"Documentary material" means any document, drawing, photograph, recording, or other tangible item containing compiled data from which information can be either obtained or translated into a usable form.
"Enterprise" means:
(1) a sole proprietorship, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, business trust, or governmental entity; or
(2) a union, an association, or a group, whether a legal entity or merely associated in fact.
"Pattern of racketeering activity" means engaging in at least two (2) incidents of racketeering activity that have the same or similar intent, result, accomplice, victim, or method of commission, or that are otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics that are not isolated incidents. However, the incidents are a pattern of racketeering activity only if at least one (1) of the incidents occurred after August 31, 1980, and if the last of the incidents occurred within five (5) years after a prior incident of racketeering activity.
"Racketeering activity" means to commit, to attempt to commit, to conspire to commit a violation of, or aiding and abetting in a violation of any of the following:
(1) A provision of IC 23-2-1, or of a rule or order issued under IC 23-2-1.
(2) A violation of IC 35-45-9.
(3) A violation of IC 35-47.
(4) A violation of IC 35-49-3.
(5) Murder (IC 35-42-1-1).
(6) Battery as a Class C felony (IC 35-42-2-1).
(7) Kidnapping (IC 35-42-3-2).
(8) Human and sexual trafficking crimes (IC 35-42-3.5).
(9) Child exploitation (IC 35-42-4-4).
(10) Robbery (IC 35-42-5-1).
(11) Carjacking (IC 35-42-5-2).
(12) Arson (IC 35-43-1-1).
(13) Burglary (IC 35-43-2-1).
(14) Theft (IC 35-43-4-2).
(15) Receiving stolen property (IC 35-43-4-2).
(16) Forgery (IC 35-43-5-2).
(17) Fraud (IC 35-43-5-4(1) through IC 35-43-5-4(9)).
(18) Bribery (IC 35-44-1-1).
(19) Official misconduct (IC 35-44-1-2)
There is also something called a Section 1983 Federal Violation.
Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.
True story, a farmer I know actually filed one (not in Indiana- different state.)
He was shooting beavers on his farm when a Wildlife Resource Officer popped up out of nowhere and issued him a citation for illegal hunting.
He said not a word until he appeared in Court.
When asked by the Judge for his plea he submitted copies of State Law regarding ongoing Agricultural Operations, his various licenses and tax forms and made a short case for why his dispatch of nuisance animals was permitted without need for recourse to Wildlife Enforcement.
Judge went through the paperwork, took a recess and came back and banged his gavel- case dismissed!
Everyone thought that was that, but as the papers rustled in the courtroom for the next case he said; "Your honor, if I may, I would like to file a Section 1983 Petition for Relief.
The Judge knew exactly what that meant and he said "It is your right to do so if you wish"
When he returned to his farm his answering machine was filled with messages from the Wildlife Officer who had never heard of this type of lawsuit.
"You are SUEING ME?"
The Farmer was a pretty laid back guy. He settled for payment of court costs by the Wildlife Officer and a promise to never exceed his authority again.
I am sure the bureaucracy was rattled all the way to the top by that little fandango.
There is an entire section of law dedicated to wildlife and working farms that is not widely studied, but probably will be now.
Best regards,