MI: Reaching out one’s door to pass identification doesn’t justify a “hot pursuit.” Protection of home is highest 4A value

Reaching out one’s door to pass identification doesn’t justify a “hot pursuit.” “In this case we must decide whether defendant’s constitutional right to be free from unreasonable seizures was violated when a police officer entered her home to complete her arrest for a misdemeanor offense. The Court of Appeals concluded that defendant exposed herself to public arrest when she reached out her doorway to retrieve her identification and that when she pulled her arm back into her home the officer’s entry was lawful as a ‘hot pursuit.’ We disagree. Defendant did not surrender her Fourth Amendment rights when she interacted with law enforcement at her doorway because she consistently maintained her reasonable expectation of privacy throughout the encounter, and further, the entry was not justified under the ‘hot pursuit’ exception to the warrant requirement. The warrantless arrest was unreasonable under Payton v New York, 445 U.S. 573, 100 S. Ct. 1371, 63 L. Ed. 2d 639 (1980). We reverse the Court of Appeals judgment and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.” People v. Hammerlund, 2019 Mich. LEXIS 1286 (July 23, 2019).