Resisting an arrest is often regarded as a crime in the USA. However, there are many cases when resistance to an unlawful arrest was found possible and lawful. For instance, United States v. Heliezer is the case that illustrates that sometimes the law permits an individual to use force to resist an unlawful arrest (Scheb, 2008, p. 341). Thus, Frank could have resisted the arrest as there were no meaningful reasons for his detention. Though, he could not use force but could give his reasons for being in the neighborhood.
The police did not have the right to arrest Frank as he did not do anything unlawful and did not pose any meaningful threat to the neighborhood. The city of Chicago v. Morales is an illustration of unlawful arrest as walking the streets and being in a neighborhood should not be associated with potential criminal activity (Scheb, 2008, p. 310). This violates people’s liberties as potentially the police have the right to restrict any movement of any individual.
The police had no right to arrest Frank on the grounds of the way he was dressed. In Cohen v. California, a man was accused of the offensive act for his wearing a shirt with an offensive slogan in a courtroom, but he was released as it was claimed that any slogan is the way people express themselves (Scheb, 2008, p. 216). Wearing a coat on a summer night cannot be an offense as different people have different tolerance to different temperatures. Besides, there was nothing offensive or threatening in Frank’s coat (no offensive slogans, no weapons).
Frank should not have been arrested under the ordinance as there were no meaningful threats to the neighborhood. The police could have asked Frank about his reasons for sitting in the park, and the police could have examined the content of his pockets. The police could have ensured Janice that Frank had his reasons and he was not a threat to the neighborhood. This could have prevented Frank’s arrest.
Reference
Scheb, J.M., & Scheb II, J.M. (2008). Criminal Law. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.