SKIP TO CONTENT
We use both our own and third-party cookies for statistical purposes and to improve our services. If you continue to browse, we consider that you accept the use of these.

Exigent Circumstances – Part One

Officers are frequently confronted with emergencies that need to be immediately dealt with, that may not fit the requirement for a warrant, and may result in the entry of areas protected by the Fourth Amendment.  Unfortunately for peace officers, the guidance given by the Courts in these situations is sometimes contradictory and often times very fact driven.  Below, the Legal Update will try to provide some guidance and questions to ask yourself when confronted by an exigent circumstance. 

 

MOTIONS TO SUPPRESS

The test for an exigent circumstance entry is whether the entry was objectively reasonable under the circumstances.  The Court will look to see if thepublic concerns for the search or seizure advances the public good versus the severity of the interference with the 4th amendment right.  The worse the emergency, the higher the justification for the action.  Of course, the reason there is concern in a criminal case regarding these types of entries is when evidence of a crime is found in the location.  

 

SOME JUSTIFICATIONS FOR WARRANTLESS ENTRIES

While not an exhaustive list, Courts have upheld warrantless entries based on the following scenarios:

Imminent threat of death or GBI to a person–Some cases actually evaluate the reasonableness of such an entry based on what the public would say if a peace officer had NOT acted. 

Sick/Injured Person-Officers go to the door and knock, hear moaning, upheld; 911 call of an accidental stabbing, upheld; Fight in progress inside house, officers outside see the fight and enter, upheld; Officers were told a victim of a violent act was on the way to the hospital, they see blood and enter home where it occurred, because of other potential victims, upheld.

Dead Body-can enter to confirm.  Then get a warrant, there is no homicide/dead body/crime scene exception to the warrant requirement.  In each example, an exigent circumstance entry and plain view observations are fine, but then get a warrant. 

911 hang-ups-may provide authority to force entry based on exigent circumstances. Officers will want to know things like: whether or not someone said something on the call, whether the dispatcher called back and there was no answer or a hang up, what the residence looks like, (ie door open, lights on, movement), prior to making an entry. 

 

SEARCH

The Court will look at whether the facts at the time of entry would lead a reasonable officer to believe that there was an urgent need to enter based on the reasonable officer’s training and experience. 

The Court evaluates the severity of the potential harm, i.e.death, GBI or destruction of property.  How imminent is the threat?  What else could have been done?  Could a warrant have been issued?  What cause did officers have to believe they needed to make entry?  While probable cause is not absolutely required it will make the entry much more supportable if you do have probable cause to believe entry is demanded. 

Remember, prior to making an exigent circumstance entry to gather as many facts about the situation as possible, and be sure to document the facts known to you at the time of the entry and your justifications for entry for your protection and the protection of the case.  



 

  • Your instructional style is engaging and your tag-team style is highly effective.

    —George Laing, Fire Prevention Captain, Investigator
  • You two are an effective teaching team, and your presentation of the material was consistently interesting, and intelligent without being too intellectualized.

    —Michele Keller, Deputy Probation Officer, County of Alameda
  • ...Provides useful tools necessary for assessing the veracity of a suspected child abuser, which goes a long way in helping to protect children.

    —Sunny Burgan, MSSW, LCSW, Social Work Supervisor, Santa Clara County DFCS
  • I will continue to use and pass on this information because I really believe in the instructors and their approach.

    —Kimberly Meyer, Washoe County Sheriff's Department
  • Your class has made the greatest and most direct impact on my assignment of any training class that I've taken.

    —Ken Gelskey, National City Police Department
  • I highly recommend this training for any Probation staff who have the necessity to interview/interrogate individuals for investigation purposes.

    —R. Bret Fidler, Santa Clara County Probation Department
  • Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to attend the Interview and Interrogation training presented by Paul Francois and Enrique Garcia.

    —Todd Almason, Santa Clara County District Attorney's Office
  • Your class gave me the confidence and tools to interview the suspect for over 5 hours and to bring a closure to the case.

    —Daniel Phelan, San Jose Police Department
  • The information that they have presented is highly relevant to my job, and was presented in a manner that was highly organized and very easy to digest.

    —Michael McGarvey, California State Prison, San Quentin
  • This was, by far, one of the most useful classes I've attended since becoming an investigator.

    —Steven Aiello, Antioch Police Department