M.D.Ala.: The apparent layout and size of house and speed with which a protective sweep was conducted shows it reasonable

The place of arrest at the threshold, the layout of the house as seen from the front door, the size of the house, and the speed with which the protective sweep (one minute and 15-30 seconds) shows that it was reasonable. United States v. Murrell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147299 (M.D. Ala. Aug. 16, 2018), adopted, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146698 (M.D. Ala. Aug. 29, 2018):

The court concludes that the task force officers’ search of the defendant’s home was a valid protective sweep under either of the two types identified in Buie. First, Hardy was arrested “right at the threshold” of the front door of the home, which opens into the living room, an area from which the officers could see into the kitchen. Approximately three or four feet from the front door and about six feet from where Hardy’s arrest was completed, a doorway opened into a bedroom on the right; this clearly was an immediately adjoining place from which an attack on the officers easily could have been launched. The house was small, consisting of — as Murrell described it at the hearing — “a living room, dining room, kitchen, den on the left side. Right side, it’s a bedroom, bathroom, bedroom, bedroom.” The first bedroom, which belonged to Murrell, was approximately 9 or 10 feet by 11 feet. Even the last bedroom on the right at the end of the home, where the two individuals who ran were found, was only about 30-35 feet from the front door. As Murrell described the house, “[i]t goes like a circle. You can go all the way to the back, you go in a door, come in the back bedroom, come back up through the front.” The officers were able to conduct the entire protective sweep, including the inspection of all possible hiding places, in only one minute 15 seconds to one minute 30 seconds, a fact which suggests that an attack could have materialized equally quickly from anywhere in the home. Under these specific circumstances, the entire house can reasonably be described as an area immediately adjacent to the location of the arrest from which an attack could have been launched. …

Even if the protective sweep was not lawful as a type one Buie search, it was fully justified under type two. Officers had a reasonable belief, based on “articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbor[ed] an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.” Buie, 494 U.S. at 334, 110 S.Ct. 1093. Specifically, when Murrell opened the front door, the officers were immediately aware of the presence of two unknown individuals in the residence. And these persons were not only present; they were in the act of running toward the rear of the house, and they would not come out when Murrell called them. Further, the arrest detail had been briefed on Hardy’s criminal history, which included felony arrests in the form of “[d]rug offenses and eluding police officers.” Officers also smelled the odor of burnt marijuana. The officers believed that, as Clemmons testified, “if there’s drug offenses involved … a lot of times weapons would be involved as well.” In addition, the officers were unaware of whether anyone else was in the house. Thus, the arrest team had a reasonable belief that the individuals who ran — and possibly other unknown persons to whom they might have run to gather reinforcements — might present a threat to ambush or otherwise harm law enforcement. …