E.D.Tex.: Pretextual claim of emergency aid exception to conduct a drug search leads to suppression

Defendant was having a seizure in his underwear on the street, about two blocks from his home. Officers could tell the smell of PCP about him. Officers went to his house and the door was cracked. Looking through the door, it looked like defendant might have somewhat trashed the place, and no one answered the officers’ calls. They went back to where he was. They decided to enter without a warrant, using the excuse of the emergency aid exception, but there was no objective evidence there was another person inside. They then got a search warrant that completely failed to mention the PCP seizure on the street. The body cam videos were helpful, and the court concludes that the only motive was investigation of a potential drug offense, not a bona fide emergency. Motion to suppress granted. The good faith exception doesn’t even apply. United States v. Leonard, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185328 (E.D. Tex. Sep. 15, 2023), adopted, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184437 (E.D. Tex. Oct. 13, 2023).

The motion to reconsider State v. Wood, 2023-Ohio-2788 (2d Dist. Aug. 11, 2023) is denied. Appellant’s argument conflates the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. State v. Wood, 2023-Ohio-3735 (2d Dist. Oct. 5, 2023).*

10 am knock-and-talk led to a consent entry. United States v. Estrella, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185020 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 16, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Knock and talk, Pretext. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.