The defendant later moved to suppress any evidence obtained as a result of his warrantless arrest. He claimed the arrest was unconstitutional and violated state law. The State must show that probable cause supported a custodial arrest, based on the totality of the circumstances. In Texas, the State also must establish that some exception to the arrest warrant requirement justified the warrantless seizure. Whether a place is considered suspicious for purposes of Article 14.03 is a highly fact-specific question.
Few places are inherently suspicious.
A person s backyard ordinarily would not be considered suspicious, but might become suspicious because of surrounding circumstances. The witnesses in this case followed the defendant home after he fled the scene of the collision. They related to the police officers who arrived at the defendant s home the details of the incident, including their impression that the defendant was intoxicated. The defendant s car had been damaged, and his wife admitted to the officers that he had been driving and was inside the house. After being admitted to the house and backyard, the officers asked the defendant whether he had been driving, and he admitted that he had.