Loat v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed Loat's convictions and held that police did not seize him when an officer merely asked to speak with him. Loat's subsequent flight through a high-crime area, his waistband movement, and the officer's knowledge that he had access to firearms together established reasonable suspicion for the stop and justified denying suppression. The Court also held that any error in describing the prior search warrant as recent was not reversible because Loat did not explain why the timing mattered.