CA5: Officers with arrest warrant could enter to secure the situation

Officers did a knock-and-talk to effect an arrest warrant, and they asked for ID. Once the person was ID’d, they stepped in, and this was not unreasonable to secure the situation. United States v. Roberts, 612 F.3d 306 (5th Cir. 2010)*:

The facts here are even stronger than in Chrisman. The Supreme Court found that the entry to maintain control was reasonable even in the “absence of an affirmative indication that the … person might have a weapon available or might attempt to escape.” Id. at 6. (emphasis added). Here, the officers acted well within their authority in stepping into Roberts’s apartment. Not only did they need to maintain control over their suspect, but they had affirmative information indicating the presence of weapons based on information provided by the other building residents.

Defense counsel’s failure to challenge the search of defendant’s cabin on a ship hauling cocaine was not ineffective assistance because it would not have prevailed in any event. De La Rosa v. United States, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69628 (D. P.R. July 12, 2010).*

Basic questions while preparing the paperwork of a stop did not unlawfully extend it. United States v. Hidalgo, 385 Fed. Appx. 372 (5th Cir. 2010) (unpublished).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.