CA5: Statutory requirement to investigate child abuse allegations promptly is not exigent circumstances

State child protection statute that requires that investigations be done promptly does not ipso facto become exigent circumstances for an entry into a home. Gates v. Texas Dep’t of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 537 F.3d 404 (5th Cir. 2008):

We can first easily dispose of any contention that the Texas Family Code’s requirement that TDPRS undertake a “prompt” investigation somehow exempts the defendants’ actions from constitutional scrutiny. A statutory command to investigate allegations within twenty-four hours is not a license to ignore the Fourth Amendment, and it is unreasonable for the defendants to think otherwise. See Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 60-61 (1968) (holding that, although a state may develop its own search and seizure law, the state may not authorize police conduct that infringes Fourth Amendment rights). Regardless of what Texas law may authorize, entry into a house by the individual defendants must satisfy Fourth Amendment standards.

Dog sniff of a car left in the Indianapolis airport parking garage was reasonable suspicion for more. Officers keyed on the car because of other information. United States v. Grogg, 534 F.3d 807 (7th Cir. 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.