Two on protective sweep

On plain error review, the protective sweep was reasonable. The officers had information that a suggested second person could have been in the house, and he or she hadn’t been found or found not to exist. United States v. Ford, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 10415 (8th Cir. Apr. 25, 2018).

Defendant was told that there may be an intruder at his house seeking revenge, and the police and he arrived at the house. Defendant consented to the police coming in to look [a kind of protective sweep]. That was consent to enter. State v. Smith, 2018-Ohio-1564, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 1707 (9th Dist. Apr. 23, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Protective sweep. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.