Indiana GOP Sen. Mike Bohacek charged with DUI months after incident
Sen. Mike Bohacek, right, talks to Sen Greg Walker, R-Columbus, on the Senate floor on Jan. 23, 2025. (Whitney Downard/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
Charges are pending against Republican Indiana Sen. Mike Bohacek for a January drunk driving incident that remained under wraps for months — shielded by legislative immunity during the 2025 session.
Bohacek, of Michiana Shores, was stopped by police on Jan. 24 after a citizen reported him 'drinking an open container and stumble out of his vehicle' at a Panda Express in Michigan City, according to charging documents obtained by the Indiana Capital Chronicle. He was later pulled over near Swan Lake Cemetery on U.S. 20, where he refused a breathalyzer test.
Police then took him to a hospital, where a blood test showed a blood alcohol content of 0.28% — more than three times Indiana's legal limit of 0.08%.
But Bohacek wasn't arrested at the time. Under Indiana law, members of the General Assembly are shielded from arrest in most cases during the legislative session — a protection known as legislative immunity.
That meant Bohacek's case was kept sealed and the senator remained uncharged for months.
Porter County Prosecutor Gary Germann, appointed as special prosecutor in the case, said the charges were filed shortly after his office was appointed in May but they weren't made public until Monday afternoon.
Two other judges recused themselves and the current Special Judge is LaPorte Circuit Judge Julianne K. Havens.
Bohacek did not respond to the Capital Chronicle's requests for comment. A Senate communications staffer also declined to comment, saying the incident 'falls into the 'personal matter' category.'
Anonymous rumors about the incident circulated online after the January incident, but details were not publicly disclosed until Monday.
Charging documents provided by Germann show that Bohacek was stopped by a Michigan City police officer just before 3:30 p.m. on Jan. 24, a Friday. The senator was allegedly speeding while driving a 2023 Dodge Charger bearing his Indiana legislative license plate.
The officer at the scene claimed Bohacek's speech was quiet and slow; that his eyes were 'red, watery (and) bloodshot,' and that he had poor balance and staggered from his vehicle. Charging records additionally note that he was 'covered in food.'
Panel advances 15-and-under social media ban
Bohacek 'admitted to consuming his prescription medication Tramadol as prescribed prior to driving.' Tramadol is a prescription opioid pain medication used to treat moderate to moderately severe pain, often after surgery or for chronic conditions, according to the Mayo Clinic.
After refusing a breathalyzer, the senator's blood was drawn at around 4:30 p.m. the same day at Northwest Health Hospital in LaPorte. Results of that test later indicated a blood alcohol content of 0.283%, and no drugs present, according to the charging paperwork.
Bohacek was back taking votes in the Indiana Senate chamber the following Monday.
Online court records show Bohacek had several prior traffic citations, including ignoring a stop sign; speeding; and driving the wrong direction on a one-way.
Bohacek was first elected to the Indiana Senate in November 2016. He represents District 8, which includes Starke County, as well as portions of LaPorte, Marshall, and St. Joseph counties. He most recently served on the Corrections and Criminal Law, Health and Provider Services, and Local Government committees.
Before joining the General Assembly, Bohacek served as a two-term LaPorte County Commissioner and was a member of the Michiana Shores Town Council.
He additionally works as an enterprise consultant with Echo Global Logistics and owns MSL Services Inc., a company based in Michiana Shores, according to his legislative biography.
A specific section in the Indiana Constitution states that lawmakers are immune from arrest during session in all cases except treason, felony, or breach of the peace during the legislative session, as well as while traveling to and from the Indiana Statehouse.
The most recent session started on Jan. 8 and adjourned on April 25.
Bohacek's charges add to a series of other alcohol-related incidents involving separate Indiana lawmakers.
CONTACT US
In May 2023, Republican Rep. Jim Lucas was arrested after crashing his vehicle into a guardrail and driving the wrong way on an interstate entrance ramp. Lucas, of Seymour, pleaded guilty to operating a vehicle while intoxicated and leaving the scene of an accident, both misdemeanors. He received a suspended sentence, was placed on probation, and was removed from interim legislative committee assignments.
Lucas was reelected for a seventh term last November.
Before that, Democratic Rep. Dan Forestal was arrested in 2019 for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, resisting law enforcement, and impersonating a public servant. Forestal, of Indianapolis, died in 2021 after his legislative tenure had ended.
In 2009, former Democratic Rep. Dennie Oxley was arrested for misrepresenting himself as a state legislator to avoid arrest for public intoxication and was later convicted. Oxley claimed legislative immunity at the time of the incident, even though he was no longer an elected representative.
And in 2002, Republican Sen. Johnny Nugent was arrested for DUI with a blood alcohol content of 0.13%. Voters repeatedly re-elected Nugent until he retired from the Indiana Senate in 2014.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
41 minutes ago
Support for solar energy, offshore wind falls among Democrats and independents: poll
Americans' support for green energy tax credits and renewable energies like wind and solar power has decreased in recent years, according to a new poll, driven by a softening in support from Democrats and independents. The poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research finds that U.S. adults' support for tax credits for electric vehicles and solar panels has weakened, as well as their enthusiasm for offshore wind farm expansion. While Democrats remain the strongest supporters of these initiatives, the poll reveals signs of growing cynicism within their ranks. The poll results coincide with sweeping changes President Donald Trump's Republican administration is making to regulations related to energy and climate change, including slashing the federal workforce in these departments. And although Democrats and independents have weakened their support for some green energy initiatives, there has not been an increase in support for Trump's energy policies. The poll found only about 4 in 10 U.S. adults — including only 1 in 10 Democrats and about 2 in 10 independents, along with three-quarters of Republicans — approve of the way Trump is handling climate change, which largely tracks with his overall approval rating. About 6 in 10 Democrats, 58%, favor tax credits for purchasing an electric vehicle, down from about 7 in 10 in 2022. Among independents, support declined from 49% in 2022 to 28%. Only one-quarter of Republicans supported this policy in 2022, and that hasn't changed measurably. 'As far as the pollution goes ... the vehicles nowadays put out very little emissions to the air,' said JD Johnson, a 62-year-old Democrat from Meadowview, Virginia, who somewhat opposes tax credits to purchase an electric vehicle. That's partly because he sees the electric vehicle manufacturing process as energy intensive and believes gasoline-powered vehicles have made improvements with the pollutants they emit. The decline in favoring solar panel tax credits was across the board rather than being concentrated among Democrats. 'For solar panels, in all honesty, I don't think they're that efficient yet,' said Glenn Savage, 78, a left-leaning independent from Rock Hill, South Carolina. 'I'd rather see them pour money into research and try to get the solar panels more efficient before they start giving tax breaks to the public. I may be wrong on that, but that's just my thought.' Scientists say transitioning to renewable energies and ditching fossil fuels that release planet-warming emissions are essential to protect the planet. Billions of dollars in project grants for clean technologies awarded during President Joe Biden's Democratic administration have been canceled by the Trump administration, and the offshore wind sector has been stunted by Trump's executive order that paused approvals, permits and loans for wind energy projects. Fewer than half of U.S. adults, 44%, now say that offshore wind farms should be expanded in the U.S., down from 59% in 2022. About half favor expanding solar panel farms, while about two-thirds were in support in 2022. When people are concerned about the economy and their personal finances, environmental issues are sometimes prioritized less, said Talbot Andrews, an assistant professor in the department of government at Cornell University who was not involved in the poll. 'I think it makes people anxious to think about increased taxes or increased spending on environmental issues when the cost of eggs are going through the roof,' Andrews said. Trump has championed the expansion of offshore oil drilling, as well as domestic coal production. Despite a decline in support for expanded renewable energies, the new poll shows that only about one-third of U.S. adults think offshore drilling for oil and natural gas should be expanded in the U.S., and only about one-quarter say this about coal mining. In both cases, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to support expanding these energy sources. Trump has sought to open up national monuments for oil drilling, but more U.S. adults oppose than support auctioning off more public space for oil drilling. Only about one-quarter of U.S. adults favor this, while 4 in 10 are opposed. Republicans are much more likely than independents or Democrats to be in support. The Energy Star program that certifies appliances, such as dishwashers and refrigerators, as energy efficient recently appeared in headlines when the EPA made plans to scrap the program. The blue and white logo is well recognized, and experts say the program has long had bipartisan support until recently. The poll found three-quarters of Democrats support providing consumer rebates for efficient home appliances, compared with 6 in 10 Republicans. Patrick Buck, 54, from Chicago, describes himself as a liberal Republican and is a fan of the consumer rebates for energy-efficient appliances. 'It seems to work in terms of transforming what people have in their houses, because a lot of people have a lot of old appliances and just can't afford new ones,' he said. The poll found only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults are 'extremely' or 'very' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of their drinking water, the air they breathe and the meat, poultry, fruits and vegetables they buy in grocery stores. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults are 'somewhat' confident in the federal government's ability to ensure the safety of each of these, and about 4 in 10 are 'not very' or 'not at all' confident. The Trump administration has announced plans to roll back rules and policies related to limiting pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, such as rules that limit pollution from power plants and blocking California's efforts to phase out cars that run on gas. The federal government has also cut staff at the Food and Drug Administration, the federal agency tasked with protecting public health and ensuring food supply safety. ___ The AP-NORC poll of 1,158 adults was conducted June 5-9, using a sample drawn from NORC's probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for adults overall is plus or minus 4 percentage points. ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
41 minutes ago
What to know about debate over protesters and ICE agents wearing masks amid immigration crackdowns
CHICAGO -- President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly called for mask-wearing at protests to be banned and for protesters whose faces are covered to be arrested, with the most recent push following demonstrations in Los Angeles over immigration raids. Legal experts told The Associated Press there are a variety of reasons people may want to cover their faces while protesting, including to protect their health, for religious reasons, to avoid government retaliation, to prevent surveillance and doxing, or to protect themselves from tear gas. With legislative action happening across the U.S., they say it's only a matter of time before the issue returns to the courts. Protesters, meanwhile, have voiced anger over footage of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents covering their faces at immigration raids and masked officers at the Los Angeles protests, calling it a double standard. Here are some things to know about the debate over face masks: At least 18 states and Washington, D.C., have laws that restrict masks and other face coverings in some way, said Elly Page, senior legal adviser with the International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. Since October 2023, at least 16 bills have been introduced in eight states and Congress to restrict masks at protests, according to the center. Many of these laws date back to the 1940s and '50s when many states passed anti-mask laws as a response to the Ku Klux Klan, whose members hid their identities while terrorizing victims. Amid protests against the war in Gaza and the Republican president's immigration policies, Page said there have been attempts to revive these rarely used laws to target protesters, sometimes inconsistently. Trump's calls to arrest protesters for wearing masks came as federal agents were seen donning masks while conducting raids in Los Angeles and other U.S. cities. Democratic lawmakers in California have introduced legislation aiming to stop federal agents and local police officers from wearing face masks amid concerns that ICE agents were attempting to hide their identities and avoid accountability for potential misconduct during high-profile immigration raids. The issue also came up at a congressional hearing on June 12, when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, criticized ICE agents wearing masks during raids, saying: 'Don't wear masks. Identify who you are.' Republican federal officials have maintained that masks protect agents from doxing. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the California bill 'despicable." Geoffrey Stone, a University of Chicago law professor, said the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that the right to free speech includes the right to speak out anonymously. But he said how it should apply to protesters wearing masks remains 'an unresolved First Amendment question.' For Stone, that raises a key question: Why should protesters and ICE agents be subject to different rules? 'The government doesn't want them to be targeted because they engaged in their responsibilities as ICE agents,' Stone said. 'But that's the same thing as the argument as to why you want demonstrators to wear masks. They want to wear masks so they can do their 'jobs' of engaging in free speech properly. The same rationale for the officers wearing masks should apply to the protesters.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Senate parliamentarian rejects GOP attempt to authorize states to conduct immigration enforcement
The Senate parliamentarian has rejected several more provisions in the Republican megabill to enact President Trump's agenda, including language authorizing states to conduct border security and immigration enforcement, which traditionally have been duties of the federal government. Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough also ruled against language in the bill that would increase the Federal Employees Retirement Systems (FERS) contribution rate for new civil servants if they do not agree to give up civil-service protections to become at-will employees. Additionally, the parliamentarian advised against a section of the bill that would allow the executive branch to reorganize federal government agencies — or eliminate whole agencies — without congressional oversight. The parliamentarian ruled these provisions violate the Byrd Rule and are not eligible to pass the Senate with a simple-majority vote on the procedural fast track known as budget reconciliation. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, hailed the parliamentarian's rulings. 'There is no better way to define this Big Beautiful Betrayal of a bill than families lose, and billionaires win. Democrats are on the side of families and workers and are scrutinizing this bill piece by piece to ensure Republicans can't use the reconciliation process to force their anti-worker policies on the American people,' Merkley said in a statement. 'The Byrd Rule is enshrined in law for a reason, and Democrats are making sure it is enforced,' he said. The parliamentarian additionally rejected a provision granting authority to agencies to unilaterally rescind funds appropriated by Congress by establishing an incentive program for federal employees to identify 'unnecessary expenditures' and transfer savings back to the Treasury Department. And she ruled against language in the bill mandating the sale of all U.S. Postal Service electric vehicles and charging infrastructure.
