Jacqueline v. Harper v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 9, 2007
Docket07-06-00129-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Jacqueline v. Harper v. State (Jacqueline v. Harper v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jacqueline v. Harper v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

NO. 07-06-0129-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

JANUARY 9, 2007 ______________________________

JACQUELINE V. HARPER, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE _________________________________

FROM THE 364TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2005-409263; HONORABLE BRADLEY S. UNDERWOOD, JUDGE _______________________________

CONCURRING OPINION

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

I concur in the judgment of the Court. I agree with the majority’s analysis as to

whether or not Officer Hayes had a reasonable basis to suspect that Appellant was or

would soon be engaged in criminal activity. However, I respectfully disagree with the

majority’s conclusion that the Officer’s interaction with Appellant amounted to no more than

an encounter. I am of the opinion that facts and circumstances of this case amounted to

an investigative detention. An investigative detention occurs when a reasonable person would believe he or

she was not free to leave and has yielded to a show of authority or has been physically

forced to yield. California v. Hodari, D., 499 U.S. 621, 627-28, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 1551-52,

113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991). Therefore, an investigative detention may occur when a person

in a parked car complies with a police officer’s order to roll down the window or open the

door. Merideth v. State, 603 S.W.2d 872, 873 (Tex.Crim.App. 1980); Ebarb v. State, 598

S.W.2d 842, 850 (Tex.Crim.App. 1979); State v. Bryant, 161 S.W.3d 758 (Tex.App.–Fort

Worth 2005, no pet.). Under the facts of this case, I am of the opinion that a reasonable

person in Appellant’s position would not have felt free to drive away from Officer Hayes at

any time during the incident. Therefore, I believe that the Officer’s request that Appellant

step out of her vehicle constituted an investigative detention.

Patrick A. Pirtle Justice

Publish.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

California v. Hodari D.
499 U.S. 621 (Supreme Court, 1991)
Merideth v. State
603 S.W.2d 872 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1980)
State v. Bryant
161 S.W.3d 758 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Ebarb v. State
598 S.W.2d 842 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jacqueline v. Harper v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacqueline-v-harper-v-state-texapp-2007.