Warrantless entries to arrest: constitutional considerations.
It is constitutional for a police officer to arrest a suspect in a public place without a warrant if the officer has probable cause Apparent facts discovered through logical inquiry that would lead a reasonably intelligent and prudent person to believe that an accused person has committed a crime, thereby warranting his or her prosecution, or that a Cause of Action has accrued, justifying a civil lawsuit. to believe the arresttee has committed a crime, regardless of whether that crime is a felony felony (fĕl`ənē), any grave crime, in contrast to a misdemeanor, that is so declared in statute or was so considered in common law. or a misdemeanor.(1) The common law rule, however, followed in many state and federal statutes, limits the authority of an officer to make a misdemeanor arrest without a warrant to circumstances when the suspect commits the misdemeanor in the officer's presence.(2)
It is not constitutionally required that an officer be faced with an emergency before making a public arrest without a warrant.(3) Arresting a person in public is one thing, entering the home to make the arrest is quite another. When an officer enters a subject's home and arrests that subject, not only has the officer seized the subject, but by entering the home, the officer also has conducted a Fourth Amendment search of the home. While it is not presumed that a public arrest without an arrest warrant is unreasonable, it is presumed that a search conducted without a search warrant is unreasonable.(4) Although an arrest warrant is a seizure Forcible possession; a grasping, snatching, or putting in possession.
In Criminal Law, a seizure is the forcible taking of property by a government law enforcement official from a person who is suspected of violating, or is known to have violated, the law. warrant and not a search warrant, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an arrest warrant carries with it the implicit authority to enter the residence of the person named in the warrant to search for that individual, provided that there is at least probable cause to believe that the individual is present in the home.(5) When a person named in an arrest warrant is believed to be in a third party's home, however, an officer must obtain a search warrant before entering, unless there is an emergency or the resident gives consent to search. An arrest warrant alone will not suffice.(6)
The presumption A conclusion made as to the existence or nonexistence of a fact that must be drawn from other evidence that is admitted and proven to be true. A Rule of Law.
If certain facts are established, a judge or jury must assume another fact that the law recognizes as a logical of unreasonableness for searches conducted without a warrant can be rebutted through one of the exceptions to the warrant requirement. A warrantless intrusion into a residence is constitutionally permissible per·mis·si·ble
Permitted; allowable: permissible tax deductions; permissible behavior in school.
per·mis if the resident gives consent or there are exigent circumstances An exigent circumstance, in the American law of criminal procedure, allows law enforcement to enter a structure without a warrant, or if they have a "knock and announce" warrant, without knocking and waiting for refusal under certain circumstances. . Courts permit police officers to make warrantless emergency entries to arrest suspects when police have reason to believe that a suspect is in the area to be entered and
1) the suspect will escape if the police do not immediately enter;
2) the suspect poses a danger to officers or others;
3) the suspect may destroy evidence; or
4) the officers are in hot pursuit of that suspect.
The primary reason that the courts allow warrantless entries in such exigent circumstances is simply that the police do not have time to obtain a search warrant. Some courts would consider whether a telephonic search warrant was available to officers when determining if there was an emergency justifying a warrantless entry. Obtaining a search warrant over the telephone expedites the warrant review process. Consequently, a telephonic search warrant is obtained much sooner than if the officer had to personally appear before a magistrate Any individual who has the power of a public civil officer or inferior judicial officer, such as a Justice of the Peace.
The various state judicial systems provide for judicial officers who are often called magistrates, justices of the peace, or police justices. with a written affidavit affidavit
Written statement made voluntarily, confirmed by the oath or affirmation of the party making it, and signed before an officer empowered to administer such oaths. . If a court determines that the officers had time to obtain a telephonic search warrant but did not do so before entering a building, then the court may rule that there was not, in fact, an emergency that necessitated the warrantless entry.(7) This article is limited to a discussion of those emergencies that would justify police entering a residence without a warrant to arrest a suspect.
Hot Pursuit Exception Requires Probable Cause
Police officers who are in hot pursuit of a criminal suspect are not required to stop in their tracks and seek a warrant before entering a residence into which the suspect has just fled. In order for police officers to make a warrantless entry under the hot pursuit exception, however, they must be hot on the trail of a suspect who is trying to flee, and the officers must have probable cause to believe that the suspect is inside the building to be searched. In Llaguno v. Mingey,(8) the full bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that a police determination of probable cause in an emergency is dependent to a great extent on the seriousness of the crime committed.
In Llaguno, two suspects committed two robberies, abducted abducted Distal angulation of an extremity away from the midline of the body in a transverse plane and away from a sagittal plane passing through the proximal aspect of the foot or part, or away from some other specified reference point a young girl, killed four people, and wounded three others, including one police officer. Police shot and captured one of the suspects after the getaway car getaway car n the thieves' getaway car → el coche en que huyeron los ladrones
getaway car n → voiture prévue pour prendre la fuite
crashed and rescued the girl unharmed. The other suspect fled on foot. The officers decided to go to the address on the car registration. The house was 2 miles from the crash site. Before going to the house, the officers drove to police headquarters to get a sledgehammer See Opteron. and a shotgun. The officers then went to the house and entered without a warrant. They arrested a suspect in the house who was found later to have had no involvement in the robbery. The officers were sued for, among other things, conducting an illegal search by entering the house without a warrant. The suspect who had fled from the crash scene was subsequently shot and killed elsewhere that night by other officers.
Despite the fact that the officers stopped in the midst Adv. 1. in the midst - the middle or central part or point; "in the midst of the forest"; "could he walk out in the midst of his piece?"
midmost of the chase and went back to police headquarters, the court still deemed that the officers were in hot pursuit of the killer.(9) The Llaguno court balanced the officers' interest in preventing escape or injury against the privacy interest of the resident and had little difficulty in finding that the officers were faced with an emergency. "The situation was an emergency in about as vivid a sense as can be imagined."(10) The court focused on the dangerousness of the circumstances. The greater the danger posed to the public, the more reason officers have for not waiting to obtain a warrant.
The court emphasized that an emergency alone is not enough; there also must be probable cause to believe the suspect is at the location to be searched. The court stated that probable cause is not a fixed point but occupies a zone somewhere between bare suspicion and virtual certainty. While the seriousness of the offense is an important factor when determining if there is an emergency, the Llaguno court also viewed it as an important consideration when determining if there is probable cause. The more serious the crime, the more latitude latitude, angular distance of any point on the surface of the earth north or south of the equator. The equator is latitude 0°, and the North Pole and South Pole are latitudes 90°N and 90°S, respectively. officers must be allowed when deciding probable cause. The address on the vehicle registration was considered sufficient for probable cause in Llaguno because the crimes were serious and the killer posed a clear and present danger.
The police in Llaguno had a bare minimum of probable cause; thin though it was, they still in fact had probable cause. In United States United States, officially United States of America, republic (2005 est. pop. 295,734,000), 3,539,227 sq mi (9,166,598 sq km), North America. The United States is the world's third largest country in population and the fourth largest country in area. v. Winsor,(11) the full bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disapproved of the police searching for a bank robber in all of the first floor rooms and some of the second floor rooms of a hotel where they had chased him. The officers finally located the bank robber after searching 15 to 25 rooms. The court found that, even though the officers were in hot pursuit of the bank robber, they only had a reasonable suspicion Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. that the robber was in any of the rooms; they did not have the requisite probable cause.
Hot Pursuit Exception Requires a Police Chase
In order for police officers to enter a building without a warrant under the hot pursuit exception, the suspect must be fleeing from a crime. By definition, if the suspect is not trying to get away, police are not in hot pursuit. For example, in Johnson v. United States,(12) police officers smelled the odor of opium opium, substance derived by collecting and drying the milky juice in the unripe seed pods of the opium poppy, Papaver somniferum. Opium varies in color from yellow to dark brown and has a characteristic odor and a bitter taste. coming from an apartment. After the officers demanded entry, the defendant opened the door and the officers entered the apartment. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the officers were not in hot pursuit of the defendant because 1) she was not fleeing from the officers; 2) she was completely surrounded by the police before she knew of their presence; and 3) she made no attempt to escape.(13) Just because police officers are moving swiftly does not mean that they are in hot pursuit. In order for officers to be in hot pursuit of a suspect, they must be chasing a suspect who is trying to get away.
Although there must be some kind of chase in order for the police to make a warrantless entry under the hot pursuit exception, the chase is not required to be the classic hue and cry hue and cry, formerly, in English law, pursuit of a criminal immediately after he had committed a felony. Whoever witnessed or discovered the crime was required to raise the hue and cry against the perpetrator (e.g. through the city streets. For instance, in United States v. Santana,(14) an undercover officer purchased heroin from a suspect who told the officer that her source of supply was "Mom Santana." The officers arrested the suspect and went to Santana's house to arrest her, as well. They saw Santana standing directly in the doorway of the house with a brown paper bag in her hand. The officers pulled up in front of the house, approached Santana, shouted "police," and displayed their identification. As the officers approached, Santana retreated into the vestibule vestibule /ves·ti·bule/ (ves´ti-bul) a space or cavity at the entrance to a canal.vestib´ular
vestibule of aorta a small space at root of the aorta. of her house. The officers followed her through the open door and arrested her in the vestibule. They found the premarked drug-buy money in her possession and her bag was later determined to contain heroin.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when Santana was standing in her doorway, she was as exposed to public view, speech, hearing, and touch as if she had been standing completely outside her house. The Court ruled that Santana could not thwart a lawful Licit; legally warranted or authorized.
The terms lawful and legal differ in that the former contemplates the substance of law, whereas the latter alludes to the form of law. A lawful act is authorized, sanctioned, or not forbidden by law. public arrest by retreating into the privacy of her home. The Court also held that even though the chase was over almost as soon as it started and did not involve a clamorous chase through the public streets, it was a hot pursuit nonetheless. In addition, the court noted that the officers reasonably believed that Santana could have taken steps to destroy evidence had they not immediately arrested her. Therefore, the warrantless entry of the house to arrest Santana was lawful. The chase in Santana lasted only seconds; but if a chase is relatively continuous, it could last for hours and still be considered hot pursuit.(15)
The officers in Santana chased the suspect from public view into the house. What if a subject leaves the scene of an offense and enters his home before the police are even called? Would the police be in hot pursuit if, after arriving at the scene, they go straight to the house and enter it in order to arrest the suspect? In Welsh v. Wisconsin,(16) a witness saw a car being driven erratically. The car eventually swerved off the road and stopped in an open field. The car did not collide col·lide
intr.v. col·lid·ed, col·lid·ing, col·lides
1. To come together with violent, direct impact.
2. with anything and nobody was injured in·jure
tr.v. in·jured, in·jur·ing, in·jures
1. To cause physical harm to; hurt.
2. To cause damage to; impair.
3. . The driver walked a short distance from the car to his house. Police officers arrived at the car within minutes and checked the registration, which revealed that the car's owner lived within walking distance of the scene. The officers proceeded to the driver's home to find him lying naked in bed. The driver was placed under arrest for driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated in·tox·i·cate
v. in·tox·i·cat·ed, in·tox·i·cat·ing, in·tox·i·cates
1. To stupefy or excite by the action of a chemical substance such as alcohol.
2. in violation of Wisconsin law.
The state of Wisconsin contended that the warrantless search of the home was reasonable on three grounds: 1) the officers were in hot pursuit of the suspect; 2) the defendant posed a threat to public safety; and 3) there was an emergency need to ascertain the driver's blood-alcohol level.
The U.S. Supreme Court, however, ruled that "...the claim of hot pursuit is unconvincing un·con·vinc·ing
Not convincing: gave an unconvincing excuse.
un because there was no immediate or continuous pursuit of the petitioner from the scene of a crime."(17) In addition, the Court was not convinced that there was a threat to public safety because the defendant already had arrived home and had abandoned his car at the scene of the accident. Finally, the court stated that the defendant's right to be secure in his home from a warrantless, nighttime entry by police officers outweighed the state's interest in obtaining evidence of his blood-alcohol level before it dissipated dis·si·pat·ed
1. Intemperate in the pursuit of pleasure; dissolute.
2. Wasted or squandered.
3. Irreversibly lost. Used of energy. . The state of Wisconsin had categorized cat·e·go·rize
tr.v. cat·e·go·rized, cat·e·go·riz·ing, cat·e·go·riz·es
To put into a category or categories; classify.
cat drunk driving as a civil infraction Violation or infringement; breach of a statute, contract, or obligation.
The term infraction is frequently used in reference to the violation of a particular statute for which the penalty is minor, such as a parking infraction.
INFRACTION. , which indicated that the state had a lower interest in prosecuting those offenses than it had in prosecuting criminal offenses. The Court held that a warrantless home entry rarely should be sanctioned when only a minor offense has been committed.(18)
Hot Pursuit of a Fleeing Misdemeanant mis·de·mean·ant
One who has been convicted of a misdemeanor.
The police officers in Welsh were not in hot pursuit. If officers are in hot pursuit of a suspect who has committed only a misdemeanor, would they be able to make a warrantless entry in order to arrest the suspect? Some courts allow officers to enter a home without a warrant if they are in hot pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanant.(19) For example, in Minnesota v. Paul,(20) the Supreme Court of Minnesota refused to make a bright-line rule A bright-line rule, or bright-line test, is a term generally used in law which describes a clearly defined rule or standard, composed of objective factors, which leaves little or no room for varying interpretation. prohibiting warrantless police entries into homes for offenses of less magnitude than a felony. The court permitted a warrantless home entry in a drunk driving case primarily because, unlike the officers in Welsh, the Paul officer Paul Officer was the Personal Protection Officer to the Prince of Wales from 1969 to 1981. Officer was made an MVO in 1982. He was born in 1940 and joined the Metropolitan Police in 1960. was in hot pursuit of the suspect.
The Paul decision is further distinguishable from Welsh because the Paul court considered a violation of the Minnesota drunk driving statute a serious offense. The Minnesota statute in Paul provided for criminal penalties and not merely the civil penalties of the Wisconsin statute in Welsh. This led the Paul court to conclude that Minnesota had a greater interest in preserving evidence of the suspect's blood alcohol level than did Wisconsin in the Welsh case.
Other courts prohibit warrantless hot pursuit entries for misdemeanors unless there is an additional emergency. For example, In Idaho v. Wren wren, small, plump perching songbird of the family Troglodytidae. There are about 60 wren species, and all except one are restricted to the New World. The plumage is usually brown or reddish above and white, gray, or buff, often streaked, below. ,(21) the Court of Appeals of Idaho ruled in a disturbing the peace case that it is not permissible for the police to make a warrantless entry if the sole reason for their entry is that they are in hot pursuit. The police, in addition, must be faced with at least one other recognized emergency before they may make a warrantless entry. A fleeing nondangerous misdemeanant would seldom present any additional emergencies. Consequently, a court that requires an additional emergency to augment the exigency of hot pursuit rarely would allow police to make a warrantless entry to arrest a suspect for a nondangerous misdemeanor.(22)
Warrantless Entries When Officers Not in Hot Pursuit
The Welsh decision involved what the Supreme Court characterized as a minor offense. In an armed robbery case involving pertinent search facts analogous to those in Welsh, the Supreme Court found that an armed robbery was sufficiently serious to allow police to enter a residence without a warrant. The Supreme Court decision in Warden WARDEN. A guardian; a keeper. This is the name given to various officers: as, the warden of the prison; the wardens of the port of Philadelphia; church wardens. v. Hayden(23) did not involve a police chase through the streets; the Court nonetheless approved of the police, without a warrant, entering a robber's home.
In Hayden, the defendant committed an armed robbery of the Diamond Cab Company in Baltimore, Maryland "Baltimore" redirects here. For the surrounding county, see Baltimore County, Maryland. For other uses, see Baltimore (disambiguation).
Baltimore is an independent city located in the state of Maryland in the United States. . Two cab drivers cab·driv·er also cab driver
One who drives a taxicab for hire.
cab driver n → taxista m/f
cab driver n → followed the robber to a residence. One cab driver radioed the suspect's description and location to the company dispatcher Software that determines what pending tasks should be done next and assigns the available resources to accomplish it. It may execute other programs or generate a list for human operators to follow. See scheduler. , who then relayed that information to police. Within minutes, officers arrived at the house, knocked, and announced their presence. They entered the residence and spread out through the house in search of the robber, who was found in an upstairs bedroom feigning sleep.
In Hayden, the Supreme Court ruled that "...neither the entry without warrant to search for the robber, nor the search for him without warrant was invalid. Under the circumstances of this case, 'the exigencies of the situation made that course imperative.'...The police were informed that an armed robbery had taken place and that the suspect had entered [the house] less than 5 minutes before they reached it. They acted reasonably when they entered the house and began to search for a man of the description they had been given and for weapons that he had used in the robbery or might use against them. The Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to delay in the course of an investigation if to do so would gravely endanger en·dan·ger
tr.v. en·dan·gered, en·dan·ger·ing, en·dan·gers
1. To expose to harm or danger; imperil.
2. To threaten with extinction. their lives or the lives of others."(24)
Many courts view Hayden as a hot pursuit case? Yet, in United States v. Santana, the Supreme Court noted that the Hayden court did not even use the term "hot pursuit" in its opinion and concluded that the Hayden case did not involve hot pursuit in the sense that the term is normally understood.(26) The Santana court stated that the search in Hayden was justified under the general label of the "exigencies of the situation." The Santana court took the position that hot pursuit requires a police chase. In Hayden, there was no chase in the classic sense. Under Hayden, even though officers are not chasing a suspect and therefore cannot be said to be in hot pursuit, they still may be permitted to enter a suspect's residence without stopping to obtain a warrant if to delay entering might give the suspect an opportunity to escape or harm the police or public.(27)
When a case involves hot pursuit, the emergency is apparent; the police are hot on the heels of a suspect who is trying to elude e·lude
tr.v. e·lud·ed, e·lud·ing, e·ludes
1. To evade or escape from, as by daring, cleverness, or skill: The suspect continues to elude the police.
2. police. However, when the basis for the emergency is not dependent upon the suspect's being hotly hot·ly
In an intense or fiery way: a hotly contested will.
Adv. 1. hotly - in a heated manner; "`To say I am behind the strike is so much nonsense,' declared Mr Harvey heatedly"; "the pursued, the courts must examine the situation more closely. In Dorman v. United States,(28) the full bench of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia District of Columbia, federal district (2000 pop. 572,059, a 5.7% decrease in population since the 1990 census), 69 sq mi (179 sq km), on the east bank of the Potomac River, coextensive with the city of Washington, D.C. (the capital of the United States). set forth the following factors to consider when deciding if exigent circumstances exist in the absence of hot pursuit:
1) whether a grave or violent crime has occurred;
2) whether officers reasonably believe the suspect is armed;
3) whether there is a clear showing of probable cause that the suspect committed the crime;
4) whether officers have strong reason to believe that the suspect is in the premises being entered;
5) whether the suspect will escape if not apprehended swiftly; and
6) whether officers can enter the premises in a peaceful manner.
While not enumerated This term is often used in law as equivalent to mentioned specifically, designated, or expressly named or granted; as in speaking of enumerated governmental powers, items of property, or articles in a tariff schedule. as one of the factors, the Dorman court indicated that whether the police entry is in the daytime or at night is important in calculating exigent circumstances.
In Dorman, the defendant and three armed accomplices robbed a clothing store at approximately 6 p.m. and stole money and clothing. The defendant picked out a blue sharkskin shark·skin
1. The skin of a shark.
2. Leather made from the skin of a shark.
3. A rayon and acetate fabric having a smooth, somewhat shiny surface. suit from the rack and made his getaway. The defendant's vanity was his undoing. He left his old pants in the changing room changing room n (BRIT) → vestuario
changing room change n (Brit) (in shop) → salon m d'essayage: (Sport) → and wore the suit when he ran from the store. Police arrived at the scene, and between 7 and 7:45 p.m., a detective found the defendant's pants containing a monthly probation report Ask a Lawyer
Country: United States of America
I was reading through my husbands probabtion report. showing the defendant's name and address. Three victims made a photographic identification of the defendant at 8:30 p.m. At 10:20 p.m., the officers entered the defendant's home without a warrant to arrest him. He was not there, but the officers located the stolen sharkskin suit in his closet.
The Dorman court found that the officers were not in hot pursuit of the suspect because the entry into the home came over 4 hours after the offense. The court, however, pointed out that the emergency the police faced was similar to hot pursuit. If the defendant discovered that he had left his probation papers behind, he would have realized that the police soon would identify him as the perpetrator A term commonly used by law enforcement officers to designate a person who actually commits a crime. . Any further delay by the officers in entering his residence might have provided him with an opportunity to escape. Entry without a warrant was permitted to prevent that escape.
While some courts have followed the Dorman approach,(29) other courts have rejected the Dorman checklist. For example, in United States v. Acevedo,(30) the court stated that the limitless array of potential facts that officers could face caution against the application of the Dorman checklist. The court considered Dorman as only a guide in determining the balance of the resident's privacy interest against the police interest in preventing escape, injury, or destruction of evidence. In addition, in Llaguno v. Mingey, the court followed the Acevedo precedent and argued against the rigid application of the Dorman factors. The Llaguno court pointed out that the issue in a warrantless entry case is simply whether the police were unreasonable in not obtaining a warrant under the circumstances that they were faced with at the time. In fact, in Welsh v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court expressly refused to approve of all of the factors listed in Dorman and simply cited Dorman as precedent that the gravity of an offense is the principal factor to be weighed when determining whether the police are faced with an emergency. Even those courts that apply the Dorman checklist do so with a degree of elasticity. For example, the full bench of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in United States v. McDonald(31) pointed out that the Dorman factors are not intended as an exhaustive canon, but merely represent a sampling of facts to be considered when deciding whether a sufficient emergency exists to excuse obtaining a warrant.(32) The court emphasized that in some circumstances, the presence of a solitary factor may be enough to establish an emergency.
The McDonald court upheld an emergency entry by government agents into an apartment that was the site of an illegal retail drug operation. Shortly before 10 p.m. on September 8, 1988, an undercover agent with the New York New York, state, United States
New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of Drug Enforcement Task Force was admitted into a one-room efficiency apartment on the first floor of an apartment building. The agent encountered a suspect sitting in a chair pointing a cocked 9 mm semiautomatic pistol at the floor but in his direction. Another suspect, Errol McDonald, was sitting on a couch counting a stack of money within easy reach of a .357 magnum revolver revolver: see small arms.
Pistol with a revolving cylinder that provides multishot action. Some early versions, known as pepperboxes, had several barrels, but as early as the 17th century pistols were being made with a revolving chamber to . There were four other men in the apartment. The agent bought a small amount of marijuana marijuana or marihuana, drug obtained from the flowering tops, stems, and leaves of the hemp plant, Cannabis sativa (see hemp) or C. indica; the latter species can withstand colder climates. and left the building.
Shortly thereafter, the agent returned to the apartment with reinforcements and knocked on the door. As soon as the agents identified themselves, they heard the sound of scuffling feet and received simultaneous radio communication from the perimeter team informing them that the occupants were attempting to escape through a bathroom window. The agents then used a battering ram battering ram
Medieval weapon consisting of a heavy timber with a metal knob or point at the front. Rams were used to beat down the gates or walls of a besieged city or castle. to enter the apartment. The agents arrested the suspects and found large quantities of cocaine and marijuana along with two loaded weapons, drug paraphernalia drug paraphernalia Controlled paraphernalia Substance abuse As defined in a regulatory context, DP is a hypodermic syringe, needle, metal or plastic (snorting) tube, or other instrument or implement or combination adapted for the administration of controlled , drug packaging materials, and several thousand dollars in cash.
The McDonald court applied the Dorman factors and ruled that the agents were faced with an emergency as soon as the undercover agent made the drug purchase.
First, the ongoing sale and distribution of narcotics narcotics n. 1) techinically, drugs which dull the senses. 2) a popular generic term for drugs which cannot be legally possessed, sold, or transported except for medicinal uses for which a physician or dentist's prescription is required. constituted a grave offense. Second, the defendant and at least one of his associates were armed with loaded, semiautomatic weapons. Third, the law enforcement agents had not only probable cause to suspect that a crime had been perpetrated but firsthand first·hand
Received from the original source: firsthand information.
first knowledge that ongoing crimes were transpiring tran·spire
v. tran·spired, tran·spir·ing, tran·spires
To give off (vapor containing waste products) through the pores of the skin or the stomata of plant tissue.
1. . Fourth, the agents further knew that the defendant and his associates were in the apartment. Fifth, the likelihood that a suspect might escape if not swiftly apprehended was confirmed by the fact that the man who actually made the sale to Agent Agee had apparently escaped during the 10-minute interval that elapsed e·lapse
intr.v. e·lapsed, e·laps·ing, e·laps·es
To slip by; pass: Weeks elapsed before we could start renovating.
n. after the controlled purchase and before the agents entered the apartment. Sixth, the agents acted in accordance with the law and first attempted to effect a peaceful entry by knocking and announcing themselves.(33)
The court listed two other considerations in addition to the Dorman factors as relevant to its decision. First, "...the volatile mix of drug sales, loaded weapons and likely drug abuse presented a clear and immediate danger to the law enforcement agents and the public at large....In addition,...the agents were confronted by an urgent need to prevent the possible loss of evidence...."(34)
The defendant argued that the agents impermissibly im·per·mis·si·ble
Not permitted; not permissible: impermissible behavior.
im created the emergency by knocking on the door and announcing their presence. The court, however, found that the emergency arose before the agents knocked on the door; it originated at the point that the agent purchased the drugs. The court further stated that, even if the exigency had not existed when the agent made the purchase, because the agents acted lawfully by knocking on the door and announcing their presence,(35) they did not impermissibly create the emergency.(36)
The McDonald court interpreted the Fourth Amendment as establishing an objective standard of reasonableness and the subjective state of mind of the agents was immaterial Not essential or necessary; not important or pertinent; not decisive; of no substantial consequence; without weight; of no material significance.
immaterial adj. . It was irrelevant whether the agents intended to create the exigency. The court thought it was not significant that the agents brought along a battering ram when approaching the door. The fact that the agents fully expected the occupants to attempt an escape or destroy evidence did not render unlawful the otherwise lawful acts of knocking on the door and identifying themselves.
The court held that "...when law enforcement agents act in an entirely lawful manner, they do not inpermissibly create exigent circumstances. Law enforcement agents are required to be innocent but not naive."(37)
The defendant also argued that narcotics-related crimes so frequently involve exigent circumstances that the exception to the warrant requirement threatens to become the rule. The court responded that, "If it is true that ongoing retail narcotics operations often confront law enforcement agents with exigent circumstances, we fail to see how such a sad reality constitutes a ground for declaring that the exigencies do not, in fact, exist. To disallow To exclude; reject; deny the force or validity of.
The term disallow is applied to such things as an insurance company's refusal to pay a claim. the exigent circumstances exception in these cases would be to tie the hands of law enforcement agents who are entrusted with the responsibility of combating grave, ongoing crimes in a manner fully consistent with the constitutional protection afforded to all citizens."(38)
If police officers are in hot pursuit of a criminal suspect and chase that suspect to a house, most courts permit the officers to follow that suspect into the house to apprehend him. It is not required that the officers stop and obtain a warrant before entering the house; there is an emergency - they are in hot pursuit. If, on the other hand, the police are not hot on the trail of a suspect, they may not enter the house under the hot pursuit exception. The officers could still enter the house without a warrant, however, if they have reason to believe that the suspect will escape or poses a threat of destroying evidence or harming the police or the public.
1 See Street v. Surdyka. 492 F.2d 368, 37172 (4th Cir. 1974); Minnesota v. Seefeldt, 292 N.W. 2d 558 (Minn. 1980).
2 E.g., 21 U.S.C. [section]878.
3 United States v. Watson, 423 U.S. 411 (1976).
4 Katz v. United States Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) was a United States Supreme Court decision that extended the Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and seizures to protect individuals in a telephone booth from wiretaps by authorities without a warrant. , 389 U.S. 347, 357 (1967).
5 Payton v. New York Payton v. New York, , 445 U.S. 573, 603 (1980). was a United States Supreme Court case concerning warrantless entry into a private home in order to make a felony arrest.
6 Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 215-16 (1981).
7 E.g., United States v. Patino, 830 F.2d 1413, 1416-18 (7th Cir. 1987) (entry of a third party's home without a search warrant to arrest a suspect was not justified as an emergency exception where the federal agents had time before the entry to obtain a telephonic search warrant).
8 763 F.2d 1560 (7th Cir. 1985) (en banc [Latin, French. In the bench.] Full bench. Refers to a session where the entire membership of the court will participate in the decision rather than the regular quorum. In other countries, it is common for a court to have more members than are ).
9 Id. at 1567. See also Reardon v. Wroan, 811 F.2d 1025, 1029 (7th Cir. 1987), which described the police in Llaguno as being in hot pursuit of the suspects.
10 Id. at 1564.
11 846 F.2d 1569 (9th Cir. 1988) (en banc).
12 333 U.S. 10 (1948).
13 Id. at 16 n.7.
14 427 U.S. 38, 43 n.3 (1976).
15 E.g., United States v. Baldacchino, 762 F.2d 170. 176 (1st Cir. 1985) (pursuit of drug suspects from a plane crash site took three and a half hours before they were finally captured in their hotel room).
16 466 U.S. 740 (1984).
17 Id. at 753.
18 Id. at 750.
19 E.g., Greiner v. City of Champlin, 27 F.3d 1346, 1353-54 (8th Cir. 1994); Gaines v. James, 433 S.E.2d 572, 576-78 (W.Va. 1993), cert (Computer Emergency Response Team) A group of people in an organization who coordinate their response to breaches of security or other computer emergencies such as breakdowns and disasters. . denied, 114 S. Ct. 721 (1994).
20 548 N.W.2d 260, 265-68 (Minn. 1996).
21 768 P.2d 1351, 1356-58 (Idaho App. 1989).
22 See, e.g., New Jersey v. Bolte, 560 A.2d 644, 652-54 (N.J. 1989) (The court prohibited a warrantless hot pursuit entry because the offenses were minor and apparently noncriminal. Id. at 654 n.12.)
23 387 U.S. 294 (1967).
24 Id. at 298-99.
25 E.g., United States v. Ford, 56 F.3d 265, 271 (D.C. Cir. 1995); United States v. Winsor, 846 F.2d 1569, 1582 (9th Cir. 1987) (en banc). Even the U.S. Supreme Court, on occasion, has described Hayden as a hot pursuit case, despite the express statement to the contrary in Santana. See, e.g., Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 394 (1978); Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499, 509 (1978).
26 427 U.S. 38, 43 n.3.
27 See United States v. McNeal, 77 F.3d 938 (7th Cir. 1996).
28 435 F.2d 385 (D.C. Cir. 1970) (en banc).
29 See. e.g.. Salvador v. United States, 505 F.2d 1348, 1351 (8th Cir. 1974); United States v. Phillips, 497 F.2d 1131, 1135 (9th Cir. 1974): United States v. Shye, 492 F.2d 886, 891 (6th Cir. 1974); Vance v. North Carolina North Carolina, state in the SE United States. It is bordered by the Atlantic Ocean (E), South Carolina and Georgia (S), Tennessee (W), and Virginia (N). Facts and Figures
Area, 52,586 sq mi (136,198 sq km). Pop. , 432 F.2d 984, 990 (4th Cir. 1970).
30 627 F.2d 68, 70 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1021 (1980).
31 916 F.2d 766 (2nd Cir. 1990) (en banc), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1119 (1991).
32 See also United States v. Robinson, 533 F.2d 578, 584 (D.C. Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1000 (1976). In Robinson, the author of the Dorman decision did not require all of the factors when determining that there was an emergency allowing a warrantless search of a motor vehicle. The court did not decide the applicability of the motor vehicle exception The motor vehicle exception was first established by the the United States Supreme Court in 1925, in Carroll v. United States.  The motor vehicle exception allows an officer to search a vehicle without a warrant as long as he or she has probable cause to believe that .
33 916 F.2d at 770 (quoting Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 298 (1967), and McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451, 456 (1948)).
34 Id. at 770. See also Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91,100 (1990), wherein where·in
In what way; how: Wherein have we sinned?
1. In which location; where: the country wherein those people live.
2. the U.S. Supreme Court cited with approval the Minnesota Supreme Court's position that in assessing the risk of danger, the gravity of the crime and likelihood that the suspect is armed should be considered.
35 There is a split in the courts as to what constitutes impermissible im·per·mis·si·ble
Not permitted; not permissible: impermissible behavior.
im creation of an emergency. Some courts look to whether the police deliberately created the exigency. E.g., United States v. Thompson, 700 F.2d 944 (5th Cir. 1983); United States v. Socey, 846 F.2d 1439 (D.C. Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 858 (1988). Other courts examine the appropriateness of the investigative tactics to see if those tactics unreasonably caused the exigency, even though the police did not deliberately create the exigency, e.g., United States v. Duchi, 906 F.2d 1278 (8th Cir. 1990); United States v. Rico, 51 F.3d 495 (5th Cir. 1995). Still other courts look to whether the police acted lawfully, regardless of whether they deliberately intended to create the exigency, e,g., United States v. Acosta, 965 F.2d 1248 (3rd Cir. 1992); United States v. Tobin, 923 F.2d 1506 (11th Cir. 1991) (en banc), cert. denied. See also Edward M. Hendrie, "Creating Exigent Circumstances," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin is published monthly by the FBI Law Enforcement Communication Unit, with articles of interest to state and local law enforcement personnel. , September 1996, 25-32.
36 See also Pennsylvania v. Govens, 632 A.2d 1316 (Pa. Super. 1993) (The police acted "lawfully" when knocking on a door and announcing "police" within 15 or 20 minutes of an undercover purchase of crack cocaine. They entered the apartment after hearing shuffling and moving about.)
37 916 F.2d at 772.
38 Id. at 772-73.
Special Agent Hendrie, DEA DEA - Data Encryption Algorithm , is a legal instructor at the FBI Academy The FBI Academy, located in Quantico, Virginia, is the training grounds for new Special Agents of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation. It was first opened for use in 1972 on 385 acres (1.6 km²) of woodland. .