VAIDIK, J.
Although no Indiana case appears to have addressed the issue of whether shoes are a deadly weapon, other jurisdictions have done so, concluding that kicking with a “shod foot” constitutes an assault with a “deadly weapon.” . . . .
These jurisdictions, like Indiana, look to the manner in which the object was used and the type of injury it is capable of inflicting when determining whether it is a deadly weapon. And although shoes are not typically deadly weapons, depending on their manner of use and the circumstances, as this case illustrates, they can be. Given that Conder’s feet and shoes were used to kick Truett in the head multiple times killing him, they were the instrumentality of Truett’s death and were, by definition, a deadly weapon. Accordingly, by considering the manner that the feet and shoes were used and the circumstances of the case before making a deadly weapon determination, Indiana now falls in line with multiple states on this point. . . . .
KIRSCH, J., and MATHIAS, J., concur.