W.D.Mo.: Entry into the curtilage was justified by exigency of a shots fired call

Defendant’s next door neighbor called 911 to report shots fired at defendant’s house. When they arrived, officers set up a perimeter and entry into the curtilage was valid based on exigency, and a cartridge case was seen in plain view. Defendant’s name was run, and it turned out he was a felon. Somebody had a video of him firing a gun out his back door, too. [Then the search claim is harmless error, if anything?] United States v. Hale, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7513 (W.D.Mo. Jan. 4, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7207 (W.D.Mo. Jan. 19, 2017).

The trial court apparently didn’t accept that defendant was speeding, but the stop was alternatively justified by the overtinted and broken windshield. The smell of marijuana coming from the car “flowered into probable cause.” State v. Baugh, 2017 La. App. LEXIS 74 (La.App. 4 Cir. Jan. 18, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Curtilage, Emergency / exigency. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.