OH5: Traffic warrant did not authorize entry into home of third person to arrest

A traffic arrest warrant did not support entry into the premises of a third person where the police had less than a suspicion that the target was there. The entry led to finding evidence against the homeowner which is suppressed. A search warrant was required. State v. Fisher, 2014-Ohio-3029, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 2963 (5th Dist. July 9, 2014):

[*P32] Assuming arguendo an “arrest warrant” did exist for Randy Fisher, it is axiomatic that for Fourth Amendment purposes, a felony arrest warrant “founded on probable cause implicitly carries with it the limited authority to enter a dwelling in which the suspect lives when there is reason to believe the suspect is within.” Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 602-603, 100 S.Ct. 1371, 63 L.Ed.2d 639 (1980). We find Payton inapplicable because Randy Fisher is not a resident of the apartment.

[*P33] In Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 222, 101 S.Ct. 1642, 68 L.Ed.2d 38 (1981), the United States Supreme Court held absent exigent circumstances or consent, police officers cannot lawfully search for the subject of an arrest warrant in a third person’s home without first obtaining a search warrant. To enter a third party’s residence to effectuate an arrest warrant on the party’s guest, police must first obtain a search warrant for the residence. Id. Police were required to obtain a search warrant prior to entering appellant’s home to execute an arrest warrant for Randy Fisher.