Category Archives: Protective sweep

N.D.Ala.: Nailed down plywood sheet wasn’t subject to removal under protective sweep but other exigency for search shown

Police entered because of a hostage situation. Removal of a nailed down plywood cover wasn’t valid as a protective sweep, but it was under exigent circumstances. United States v. Cooks, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83992 (N.D.Ala. April 28, 2017), adopted, … Continue reading

Posted in Dog sniff, Emergency / exigency, Protective sweep | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: Nailed down plywood sheet wasn’t subject to removal under protective sweep but other exigency for search shown

CA2: Protective sweep leading to plain view doesn’t require immediate seizure

Police entered the apartment with an arrest warrant for one occupant and found four living there. A gun and drugs were in plain view. During a protective sweep, a gun and cell phone were found in defendant’s room. They weren’t … Continue reading

Posted in Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep | Comments Off on CA2: Protective sweep leading to plain view doesn’t require immediate seizure

N.D.W.Va.: Officers arrived at an injured person call, and the assailant wasn’t around; protective sweep permissible

“Here, the officers arrived to a chaotic scene. The Defendant was severely injured after being hit by a bottle. There were at least two other individuals present. The Police were told the assailant, who had demonstrated his violent nature, was … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Protective sweep | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: Officers arrived at an injured person call, and the assailant wasn’t around; protective sweep permissible

N.D.Ala.: Entry with CPS worker to retrieve diaper bag was reasonable

A couple was arrested, and their infant was going with child protective services. An entry into the house with the CPS worker to recover the infant’s diaper bag was reasonable.United States v. Wright, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72738 (N.D. Ala. … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep, Reasonableness | Comments Off on N.D.Ala.: Entry with CPS worker to retrieve diaper bag was reasonable

NJ: Protective weapons search may be obviated by officers’ control of the situation

Reasonable suspicion that a vehicle may contain a weapon can be obviated by the number of officers controlling the scene. Here, the officers outnumbered the occupants of the car and had everybody out, so nobody was getting access to a … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep | Comments Off on NJ: Protective weapons search may be obviated by officers’ control of the situation

M.D.Fla.: Attempted flight to back of house from arrest in the home justified protective sweep

Officers entered with an arrest warrant. Defendant’s attempt to flee to the back of the house justified a protective sweep of that area because of the possibility there might be others back there. United States v. Thompson, 2017 U.S. Dist. … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Attempted flight to back of house from arrest in the home justified protective sweep

KY: Arrest outside away from door did not justify protective sweep inside

A protective sweep wasn’t justified because the arrest was outside the apartment building away from view. Exigency also didn’t exist because there was no justification for thinking that there might be an injured person inside. Pace v. Commonwealth, 2017 Ky. … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep | Comments Off on KY: Arrest outside away from door did not justify protective sweep inside

D.Minn.: 911 call about two men entering house with guns couldn’t be corroborated at all at scene; entry for protective sweep unreasonable

“The information provided to the police was that a caller called 911 and said ‘there’s two men that came inside the house with guns.’ (Transcript at 9.) The police were also given the address of the subject house. (Id.) Based … Continue reading

Posted in Protective sweep | Comments Off on D.Minn.: 911 call about two men entering house with guns couldn’t be corroborated at all at scene; entry for protective sweep unreasonable

D.Conn.: Protective weapons search of nightstand for a weapon invalid where def removed from house in handcuffs

The court does not believe an officer who claimed to have seen crack cocaine in a black opaque drawstring bag that was closed in the first search of his person. The court also does not believe that a much later … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Protective sweep | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Protective weapons search of nightstand for a weapon invalid where def removed from house in handcuffs

IN: No RS for a protective sweep after def was arrested

A protective sweep of a closed room requires reasonable suspicion that an attack could be launched from the room. After defendant was arrested, there was no reasonable suspicion there was anybody else in the house; therefore, no reasonable suspicion. Johnson … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Protective sweep | Comments Off on IN: No RS for a protective sweep after def was arrested

D.Ore.: Def stopped at roadblock from Malheur National Wildlife Refuge could be searched again after he went back to talk others into leaving

Defendant arrived at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January 2016. After arrests and the killing of one, he decided to leave and encountered a roadblock where he was briefly searched. Officers asked if he would go back to the … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Protective sweep, Roadblocks | Comments Off on D.Ore.: Def stopped at roadblock from Malheur National Wildlife Refuge could be searched again after he went back to talk others into leaving

D.Conn.: Shots fired call is not per se exigency; totality standard must apply

A shots fired call is not carte blanche exigency–the totality of circumstances must still be examined. Here, the court finds no exigency for the warrantless entry or protective sweep and that the exclusionary rule should be applied. The costs aren’t … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Exclusionary rule, Protective sweep | Comments Off on D.Conn.: Shots fired call is not per se exigency; totality standard must apply