In State v. Murphy, No. 2-06-00267-CR, 2007 WL 2405120 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth Aug. 23, 2007, no pet.), the police officer approached Murphy as he tried to push his motorcycle up an embankment in a city park, asked "what had happened," and "informed him that it was unlawful for him to operate the motorcycle within the park." Murphy admitted that "the motorcycle belonged to him, . . . that he was the one who was riding it," and that he was dizzy. Id. As the officer helped push the motorcycle up the embankment, the officer suspected that Murphy was intoxicated after noticing that he had bloodshot, watery eyes, was disoriented, had slurred speech, and had the smell of alcohol on his breath. Id. The officer then administered field sobriety tests and arrested Murphy for driving while intoxicated. Id. The Court concluded, based on the totality of circumstances, that the officer was justified in approaching Murphy and that the initial interaction was a consensual encounter because the officer had merely engaged Murphy in a conversation, informed him of a law of which he might be unaware, and helped him with his motorcycle. There was no evidence that the officer displayed his weapon, physically threatened Murphy, used harsh language or touch, activated flashing lights, or prevented Murphy from leaving, and no evidence existed that Murphy did not feel free to leave. Id. The Court further concluded that the facts learned in the initial consensual encounter provided ample specific, articulable facts that led the officer reasonably to conclude that Murphy had been engaged in criminal activity. Id.