Okay--so we know it's no defense to the charge if the arrest was unlawful. How does this play out? I've got an unlawful entry into a home (chasing someone into their house ... they've evaded, and maybe committed disorderly conduct, but no felony), and once inside, the resisting starts. What if a motion to suppress the arrest is filed? It's still an unlawful arrest, can it be suppressed pretrial? Do you have to go rearrest the guy lawfully? And, do I even want to fight this fight?! Anyway, thoughts are appreciated.

So you have an unlawful resisting to an unlawful arrest?

you might look at State v. Iduarte
268 S.W.3d 544, 551 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)("If appellee did point the gun at Officer Eddleman, that act constituted an independent criminal offense committed after the complained-of entry, and the acquisition of evidence of the independent offense was not causally connected to the officer's allegedly illegal entry.").

I'm not a lawyer so the following is probably wrong but that never stopped me before so here goes:

By Texas law resisting an unlawful arrest is a crime but both the Texas and Federal Constitution give the citizen the right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure in his house... So this suspect may have had the right to demand that the warrantless officer leave the home.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and 
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, 
but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, 
and particularly describing the place to be searched, 
and the persons or things to be seized.

The plain wording of the fourth amendment leaves some wiggle room around the word "unreasonable" and the courts have found several exceptions... the exigent circumstance exception doesn't apply if the officer's primary motive for entering was simply to make an arrest... but it can apply to prevent a suspect's escape... it is a mixed question of fact and law.

Important facts in the state's favor:
1. The suspect has knowledge that the police are chasing him.
2. The police have knowledge that this particular suspect has attempted to escape.

Would it have been reasonable for one officer to watch the front door and another officer to watch the back door while waiting for a warrant? Did this occur at a time of day when there was even a magistrate on duty to sign such a warrant? Was the suspect's car parked in the driveway such that an officer could have "parked him in" to prevent escape? Was guy suspected of carrying drugs that he could flush or otherwise destroy evidence in the home if the officers waited for a warrant?


I don't think the Constitution plays by the rules of "Hide and Go Seek." That game's rules, at least in my neighborhood, required the Seeker (aka "It") to find and tag one Hider before all the Hiders could reach "home base"... so, as a found Hider, you could avoid becoming the next "It" by eluding the Seeker and running home before being tagged.

Exigent circumstances wouldn't apply (hot pursuit)?

I think bgreer is right that hot pursuit should get the cop into the house. Randolph v. State, 152 S.W.3d 764, 771-72 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2004, no pet.)("if an offense, either a misdemeanor or a felony, is punishable by confinement and there are exigent circumstances, then it is serious *772 enough to justify the warrantless entry of a constitutionally protected area. See generally Welsh, 466 U.S. at 754, 104 S.Ct. 2091 (a nonjailable, civil traffic offense in the absence of exigent circumstances was not sufficiently serious to allow a warrantless entry); Waugh, 51 S.W.3d at 719 n. 3 (discussing Welsh, Winter, and LaHaye); LaHaye, 1 S.W.3d at 152 (the misdemeanor crime of evading arrest was a serious enough crime that officers in hot pursuit could enter a residence without a warrant and arrest an offender); Winter, 902 S.W.2d at 573-74 (a police officer could make a warrantless entry into a home if he was in hot pursuit of a suspect who committed a misdemeanor offense punishable by confinement in jail);").

As to whether the officer had a basis for a warrantless misdemeanor arrest, maybe he had facts that would justify an arrest for evading under CCP 14.01(b).

yeah, i think we can justify an evading. thanks for this case law. i really didn't think it rose to hot pursuit... guess i always considered it more as "fleeing felon."