In Amores v. State, 816 S.W.2d 407, 410 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) the appellant was arrested for possession of cocaine. On appeal, he claimed that the evidence was illegally seized through a warrantless arrest. Ibid. This Court held that the appellant's initial detention was an arrest, not an investigative stop because the officer blocked the appellant's car, drew his revolver at the appellant, ordered him from the car at gunpoint, ordered him to lie face down and told him he would be shot if he did not obey orders. Ibid. The arresting officer testified that the facts known to him at the time of the arrest were the following: the police received a telephone report of a burglary in progress involving a black male putting something in the trunk of a car; the location of the reported burglary was at an apartment complex whose manager he knew to have called in numerous reports of criminal activity; upon arriving at the scene within one minute of the report, he observed a black male sitting at the wheel of the car; the car was backed into a parking space; the black male was about to drive away as the officer drove into the lot; and 6) he knew that no "blacks" lived at these apartments at this time. Id. at 413-14. The officer further acknowledged that, at the time he arrived on the scene, no burglary was occurring from his viewpoint and that, until the point at which he found the weapon in the appellant's car, he did not observe any violation of the law. Id. at 414. This Court held that, where events are as consistent with innocent activity as with criminal activity, the arrest of a suspect based on those events is unlawful under Article 14.03(a)(1). Ibid.