Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Davis v. State

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided May 8, 2002No. CA CR 01-503Published

1ConcurrenceSam Bird, Judge

I concur in the reversal of this case, but I do not agree with the basis of the majority’s decision. Unlike the majority, I believe that reasonable suspicion existed to detain Davis; but I would reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to grant Davis’s suppression motion because the search of his outer clothing (commonly referred to as a “frisk”) violated Rule 3.4.

In Stewart v. State, 332 Ark. 138, 964 S.W.2d 793 (1998), the court reversed a trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress when Stewart was detained by officers because she was standing on a street corner in a known…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Illinois v. WardlowSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. United States v. ArvizuSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Stewart v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API