Defendant was convicted, in the District Court of resisting an officer. Defendant appealed.
The Court of Appeal held that:
- Evidence was sufficient to support conviction;
- Police officers had reasonable suspicion that defendant had committed crime of battery so as to warrant investigatory stop to question defendant regarding his actions; and
- Officers had probable cause to arrest defendant for resisting an officer after officers arrived at defendant’s property to question him and defendant repeatedly refused officers’ requests to secure his three dogs.