Villanueva v. State (Majority, with Dissenting)
Annotate this CaseDefendant entered a conditional plea of guilty to driving without a driver's license. Defendant reserved the right to appeal the circuit court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence found in what he claimed was an illegal stop. Defendant was stopped for operating an unsafe motor vehicle when the arresting officer noticed a windshield crack on the vehicle Defendant was driving. Defendant appealed, arguing, among other things, that the traffic stop was based entirely on "profiling" and was thus illegal. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) a windshield with a crack running from roof post to roof post across the driver's field of vision is the type of "safety defect" contemplated by Ark. Code Ann. 27-32-101(a)(2)(A), and therefore, the arresting officer's assessment that Defendant's cracked windshield constituted a safety defect was not a mistake of Arkansas law; and (2) the trial court did not err in crediting the arresting officer's testimony, and therefore, the Court had no reason to question the officer's credibility.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.