|
|
The Supreme Court has ruled that Officers may enter a
home without a warrant or an invitation if they observe
a brawl through a window, the high court has ruled
unanimously. Police officers may go into a home
uninvited and without a search warrant to break up a
fight they have seen through a
window, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.
Usually, homes are off-limits to the police and
government searches, except when officers have obtained
a warrant from a judge. In the past, however, the court
has said there is an exception for emergencies, such as
a fire at the residence.
In Monday's decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
said a fight in progress is the kind of emergency that
justifies quick action by the police.
"The role of a peace officer includes preventing
violence and restoring order, not simply rendering first
aid to casualties," Roberts said. "An officer is not
like a boxing ... referee, poised to stop a bout only if
it becomes too one-sided."
The unanimous decision overturned rulings by the Utah
state courts, which held that a loud party and a drunken
fight did not give police reason enough to burst into a
home without a warrant.
The state's judges said the officers in this case
appeared more interested in breaking up the loud party
than in aiding a seriously injured person. But Roberts
said the officers' motives did not matter. What counted,
he said, were the objective facts.
"In these circumstances, the officers had an objectively
reasonable basis for believing both that the injured
adult might need help and that the violence in the
kitchen was just beginning. Nothing in the 4th Amendment
required them to wait until another blow rendered
someone 'unconscious' and 'semi-conscious' or worse
before entering," the chief justice wrote.
The case began in the early morning hours of July 23,
2000, when police in Brigham City, Utah, responded to a
complaint about a loud party. The four officers heard
shouting from inside the house, including calls to
"Stop! Stop!"
When the officers walked down the driveway, they saw two
juveniles drinking beer in the backyard.
From there, they saw, through a screen door and the
kitchen window, another juvenile swing his fist and
strike an adult in the face, drawing blood.
The officers, shouting "Police!" entered the kitchen,
broke up the fight and arrested several of the adults on
suspicion of being drunk and disorderly.
The adults in turn demanded that the police leave the
premises.
When the Utah courts subsequently suppressed evidence
against the adults obtained after the officers entered
the home without a warrant, state prosecutors urged the
Supreme Court to hear the case to clarify what was
considered an emergency exception to the 4th Amendment.
In Brigham City vs. Stuart, Roberts said the officers
did not need a warrant because they were breaking up a
fight, not searching the premises.
Moreover, he said, they did not need to knock on the
door before entering because they would not have been
heard.
"It would serve no purpose to require them to stand
dumbly at the door awaiting a response," Roberts wrote,
"while those within brawled on, oblivious to their
presence."
This collection of information was forwarded to you by
the South Georgia Information Network. The information
is shared with law enforcement agencies for that purpose
only and should not be distributed to outside of law
enforcement.
If you want to be removed from this listing simply let
me know. If you know of other investigator's that would
like to be added to the list please give them my
telephone number or e-mail address. If you have
questions or comments feel free to call me at {229}
671-2933.
|