LA4: Hot pursuit of fleeing misdemeanant into house was reasonable

Hot pursuit for a fleeing misdemeanant (discarding an apparent joint in public in front of officer) into his home was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. State v. Bell, 28 So. 3d 502 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2009), released for publication February 12, 2010, writ denied by State v. Bell, 2010 La. LEXIS 533 (La. Mar. 5, 2010).

Questions to the defendant amounted to a seizure because he was not free to go. The emergency aid exception argued by the state fails because there was no concern expressed by the officer for defendant’s well-being. State v. Montano, 2009 NMCA 130, 147 N.M. 379, 223 P.3d 376 (2009).*

Defendant as a mere possessor of a cell phone did not have standing to contest the state’s production of records from the cell phone. He did not show a connection to the cell phone. State v. Stitt, 201 N.C. App. 233, 689 S.E.2d 539 (2009).*

Defendant was reasonably ordered out of his car because of a window tint violation because the officer could not see through the windows. It was not unreasonable for the officer to shine his flashlight into the vehicle and see the butt of a gun that led to the seizure of the gun. State v. Hunt, 25 So. 3d 746 (La. 2009).*

Apparent hand-to-hand transaction and defendant’s flight was reasonable suspicion. State v. McMillan, 30 So. 3d 36 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2009).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.