exigent circumstances Flashcards
exigent circumstances analysis?
case by case basis, categorical rules not permitted
if no exigent circumstances?
police may not affect a warrantless arrest
prerequisite to gaining entry into a residence without a warrant
officers must have probable cause to believe that dangerous or suspicious activity is currently taking place
exigent circumstances allowing police to follow suspect into home
1) to prevent destruction of evidence;
(2) to prevent imminent violence;
(3) to prevent the suspect from fleeing the home; or
(4) in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon, but only if the pursuit began in a public place in which the police could have made a warrantless arrest.
(1) Does the Fourth Amendment permit officers in hot pursuit of a fleeing felon to enter a home, into which the suspect had fled, and search the home without a warrant?
Under the exigent-circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement, officers may conduct a warrantless search if delaying the search would be inappropriate under the circumstances. For example, officers may enter a house and conduct a warrantless search if speed is necessary to avoid grave danger to the officers or others.
Does the exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment allow warrantless entry into a home to arrest an individual for a minor traffic offense?
No. Warrantless entry to search a home or make an arrest is only permitted in cases of emergency, or exigent circumstances. Whether such an emergency exists depends largely upon the seriousness of the offense and the dangers posed by waiting until a warrant is secured. The exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement generally does not apply when only a minor crime has been committed.
May a suspect defeat a warrantless arrest that began in a public place by retreating to a private place?
No. An arrest that occurs in a public place based on probable cause, but without a warrant, does not violate the protections of the Fourth Amendment. A location will be considered a public place if there is no expectation of privacy in that place. Similarly, there will be no expectation of privacy for any thing or any location that a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home. A pursuit for a warrantless arrest that began in a public place will not be defeated by the suspect’s attempt to escape into a private place.
Absent exigent circumstances, can police enter a home without a warrant in pursuit of a fleeing misdemeanant?
No. The hot-pursuit exception does not apply to fleeing misdemeanants.
Under the Fourth Amendment, may police enter a home without a warrant if an occupant is injured or in immediate danger?
yes. police may enter into a home without a warrant to help an occupant who is seriously injured or in immediate danger of injury. This is an objective standard, and the subjective intentions of the police do not render such entry unreasonable.
May warrantless searches be justified under the Fourth Amendment if exigent circumstances require law enforcement to act without delay?
Yes. Under the exigent-circumstances doctrine, the Fourth Amendment is not violated by warrantless searches when law enforcement has a compelling, urgent need to enter to render aid or take action. Such searches are justified to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence, to pursue a fleeing suspect, or to assist or prevent imminent injury or harm. Exigent-circumstances determinations will hinge on the gravity or immediacy of the potential harm, as well as the level to which the warrantless action intruded on the defendant’s privacy interests.
Where a homicide occurs, may police search the scene of the crime without first obtaining a warrant?
No. The Fourth Amendment protects individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 357 (1967), the Court held that a search conducted without first obtaining a warrant is per se unreasonable unless it falls into one of the exceptions to the warrant requirements.
In drunk-driving investigations, does the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream constitute an exigency that in every case is sufficient to justify conducting an involuntary blood test without a warrant?
No. In drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not constitute an exigency that in every case is sufficient to justify conducting an involuntary blood test without a warrant. Under the Fourth Amendment, subject to some exceptions, the invasive nature of such a test generally requires a neutral and detached magistrate to authorize the test by issuing a warrant
Does exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement apply to an officer-created exigency if the exigency does not arise from the officer’s unreasonable or unconstitutional conduct?
Yes. Some courts criticize the doctrine and note that law enforcement may create the “urgent” circumstances, or exigency, in order to gain entry into a residence without a warrant. Here, King argues that the officers created the exigency by requesting entry into the apartment after they forcefully banged on the door and yelled that law enforcement was outside. However, an officer is free to knock on a door as is any other private citizen. A rule that would dictate to police officers how forcefully to knock on a door and how loudly to announce their presence is unreasonable.
Will criminal evidence be suppressed pursuant to the exclusionary rule if law enforcement officers had an independent source of information justifying a valid search and seizure of the evidence?
No. The exclusionary rule is intended to deter police conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment by suppressing evidence the police find as a result of such conduct. However, whenever the rule is applied, the public’s interest in punishing crime suffers. Therefore, the rule must be applied only when evidentiary suppression will deter future police misconduct. That is not the case when the police have an independent source of information leading them to the evidence. In such circumstances, the connection between the Fourth Amendment violation and the discovery and seizure of evidence is so attenuated that the violation does not taint the evidence.
Is a temporary seizure lawful if it is supported by probable cause, limited in nature, and tailored reasonably to secure law enforcement needs while also protecting privacy interests?
Yes
