unlawfulness of an arrest may not be raised as a defense to a prosecution under this section ... [unless] the officer used more force than is reasonably necessary to effect the arrest so that his conduct constitutes an assault on the person arrested.” KRS 520.090. Federal case law is also instructive. In United States v. Beauchamp, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reaffirmed its holding that “if a suspect’s response to an illegal stop is a new and distinct crime, such as flight or use of force, any evidence recovered incident to the arrest for the subsequent crime is not tainted by the unlawfulness of the initial detention.” 659 F.3d 560, 574 (6th Cir.2011) (emphasis added) (citation omitted); see also United States v. Bailey, 691 F.2d 1009, 1017 (11th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Dawdy, 46 F.3d 1427, 1431
holding that a defendants response to even an invalid arrest or terry stop may constitute independent grounds for arrest holding that if a suspects response to an illegal stop is itself a new distinct crime then the police constitutionally may arrest the suspect for that crime holding that police officers had probable cause to arrest a suspect where the facts suggest a fair probability that the suspect has committed a crime holding that possession of a weapon is not in an of itself a crime holding police may legally arrest a defendant for a new distinct crime even if the new crime is in response to police misconduct and causally connected thereto