Fowler v. State
2010 Ark. 431
Ark.2010Background
- Fowler entered a conditional guilty plea in Arkansas to challenge suppression rulings following a prior arrest.
- On Oct 22, 2007, Fowler was arrested for fleeing and obstruction while parole officers notified police of his parole status.
- Police searched Fowler’s home after he admitted possession violating his probation; weapons and narcotics were found and Fowler faced multiple charges.
- At issue are suppression motions challenging the legality of two police encounters: an initial stop and a later stop/arrest after Fowler fled.
- The majority reverses the circuit court on the second stop and arrest, and remands to suppress the challenged evidence and statements; the dissent would uphold the arrests.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the initial stop lawful based on reasonable suspicion? | Fowler argues no reasonable suspicion justified the first stop. | State argues the initial encounter was a permissible, non-seizure question-and-answer contact. | Initial stop lawful; no Fourth Amendment violation. |
| Did Fowler’s flight justify a second stop and arrest, or did it transform the stop into an unlawful seizure? | Fowler contends no lawful basis to stop or arrest beyond flight; arrest exceeded reasonable suspicion. | State contends that running after a stop can justify pursuit and detention for investigation. | Second stop/arrest transformed into illegal seizure; suppression required. |
| Was the later arrest proper given Wardlow and lack of immediate investigation for parole status? | None stated beyond arguing suppression of the resulting evidence. | State argues arrest for fleeing/parole-based considerations was permissible while investigation occurred after arrest. | Arrest not justified; suppression of evidence and statements required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (unprovoked flight plus location inform reasonable suspicion; limits on stop and subsequent investigation)
- Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Ct. of Nev., 542 U.S. 177 (2004) (reasonable suspicion allows brief stop to verify identification)
- Cockrell v. State, 2010 Ark. 258 (Ark. 2010) (framework for categorizing police encounters and seizures; Wardlow cited)
- Thompson v. State, 303 Ark. 407 (1990) (definitions of encounters and seizures in Arkansas context)
- United States v. Hernandez, 854 F.2d 295 (8th Cir. 1988) (cited for reasoning on encounters and reasonable suspicion)
- Osborn v. Bryant, 2009 Ark. 358 (Ark. 2009) (jurisdictional framework for review of suppression orders)