 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Shultz v. State12/4/2002
o Ark. R. Crim. P.[ ] 2.1 and 3.1. In fact, if the first officer [Pool], who had the right to legally stop ppellant, continued on with his investigation, and actually made the arrest, then ppellant admits it would be a legal arrest." We hold that because appellant conceded that the initial stop by Officer Pool was legal and he had jurisdiction to arrest appellant under the fresh pursuit exception, Officer Swanfeld also had jurisdiction to arrest appellant.
The Arkansas Supreme Court has held that "an arrest is valid when the arresting officer is accompanied by a duly qualified officer" with jurisdiction to make the arrest. Colston v. State, 346 Ark. 503, 513, 58 S.W.3d 375, 383 (2001) (limited on other grounds). In Colston, supra, Saline County police officers requested the assistance of Pulaski County police officers to apprehend a defendant located in Pulaski County. The Pulaski County officers were on the scene, acting in concert with the Saline County officers in the investigation when the defendant was arrested. The court in Colston relied on the holding in Logan v. State, 264 Ark. 920, 576 S.W.2d 203 (1979), where a Crittenden County deputy sheriff sought assistance from a St. Francis County deputy sheriff to arrest the defendant while he was in St. Francis County. See Colston, supra, at 512, 58 S.W.3d 382.
Although in Colston and Logan the arresting officers were accompanied by officers from the jurisdiction where the arrest occurred, the holdings of these cases stand for the proposition that the presence of an officer with full authority to make the arrest legitimizes the arrest. In the present case, appellant does not dispute that Pool was at the scene when the arrest occurred. Therefore, we hold that once appellant conceded that the initial stop by Pool was legal, Swanfeld's jurisdiction to arrest appellant was legitimized. Under the circumstances of this case, we cannot say the trial judge erred in denying appellant's motion to suppress.
Affirmed.
Stroud, C.J., and Roaf, J., agree.
Page 1 2 Arkansas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|