PA: Firing an assault rifle in your house justifies a protective sweep

After defendant fired an assault rifle in his house, the police were called. A protective sweep to see if anyone was injured was reasonable. Commonwealth v. Coughlin, 2018 PA Super 304, 2018 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1221 (Nov. 14, 2018).

“‘Probable cause “is not a high bar.”’ District of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S.Ct. 577, 586, 199 L. Ed. 2d 453 (2018) (quoting Kaley v. United States, 571 U.S. 320, 338, 134 S. Ct. 1090, 188 L. Ed. 2d 46 (2014)).” The affidavit for the search warrant reaches that low bar. “Lockwood’s assertion that the affidavit fails to establish criminality on his part is immaterial. Probable cause is a flexible standard, requiring a ‘“practical, nontechnical’ probability that incriminating evidence is involved.” United States v. Cantrell, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192655 (E.D. Ky. Nov. 12, 2018).*

The consenter doesn’t need actual authority; it only requires apparent authority. She said she was the owner of the car, and she acted like the owner of the car. United States v. Wright, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192546 (M.D. La. Nov. 12, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Apparent authority, Probable cause, Protective sweep. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.