Arthur v. State
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Andre Arthur was convicted of failing to obey a lawful order and resisting arrest. The court of special appeals affirmed Arthur's convictions, holding that although the issue of an unlawful arrest was factually generated, the trial court did not err in using a pattern jury instruction rather than Arthur's proposed jury instruction because the language of the pattern jury instruction adequately conveyed that the arrest must be lawful. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of the intermediate appellate court, holding that because the evidence presented at trial generated the issue of whether Stanley had probable cause to arrest Arthur, (1) the pattern jury instruction did not fairly cover the issue of whether the arresting officer had probable cause to arrest Arthur, and (2) the trial court abused its discretion in failing to provide a jury instruction on the law concerning Arthur's right to resist an unlawful arrest. Remanded for a new trial.
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.