Breedlove v. State (605 So. 2d 589, 1992)

PER CURIAM.

Appellant moved for judgment of acquittal on a charge of resisting arrest without violence because he claimed that the officer was not engaged in the lawful execution of a legal duty when trying to stop appellant. See Nelson v. State, 543 So.2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA1989). The state charged that appellant resisted arrest by fleeing from Officer Arney when he attempted to stop appellant. The issue is whether the officer had an articulable suspicion of illegal activity when he attempted the stop. The officer saw appellant crossing a vacant field. When appellant saw the officer, he made a furtive movement as if to hide something behind his back and ran away. The officer ordered appellant to stop and then pursued but lost sight of appellant. This is insufficient to justify a stop. “Suspicious or furtive movements are not reasonable grounds to justify a stop and detention, even when combined with flight in a high crime area.” Daniels v. State, 543 So.2d 363 (Fla. 1st DCA1989). See also Nelson v. State, 543 So.2d 1308 (Fla. 2d DCA1989); R.B. v. State, 429 So.2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA1983).

Since the officer had no grounds to stop appellant, appellant cannot be resisting the officer by running away. We therefore reverse the conviction and sentence for resisting arrest without violence.

ANSTEAD, WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.