Court Opinion

ID: 9769615
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 14:56:03.562275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:05.586995
License: Public Domain

CLINTON, Judge,
dissenting.
In overruling appellant’s first ground of error the majority opines that “the arrest was proper under Art. 14.04, V.A.C.C.P.” Given the facts of the matter, the authorities then cited are inapposite. A citizen who has done no more than deplane and walk into a public terminal of an airport at five o’clock of an afternoon shows no sign he is “about to escape,” as Article 14.04 requires.
Moreover, even if the long standing objective test has fallen, there is no showing here “that the officer was acting upon satisfactory proof from representations of a credible person that the felony offender ‘is about to escape, so that there is no time to procure a warrant,’ ” Fry and Martinez v. State, 639 S.W.2d 463 (Tex.Cr.App.1982).
I respectfully dissent.