{"id":5704,"date":"2011-07-02T12:57:05","date_gmt":"2011-06-28T05:51:17","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-06-27T07:56:13","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5704","title":{"rendered":"OH5: 911 call that defendant was suicidal with weapons brought police to his house where they found him coming out; he was frisked and his house was validly entered for the weapons"},"content":{"rendered":"

A 911 dispatcher radioed the police department and stated to an officer that defendant had guns in the house and was threatening to commit suicide, hurt himself and others. As the police approached the residence, defendant exited the home talking on a cellphone. An officer secured defendant and frisked him for weapons. The government had a legitimate interest in conducting a search of a residence. The first thing the officer observed on a table was marijuana that appeared to be packaged for sale along with other drug paraphernalia. The trial court erred in granting the motion to suppress the evidence, because there was sufficient evidence of exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless entry. The officers acted within their discretion because entry into the home was necessary to secure the safety of themselves, the paramedics, and other people possibly inside the home. Drug evidence was found. \u201c\u2018The right of the police to enter and investigate in an emergency without accompanying intent to either search or arrest is inherent in the very nature of their duties as peace officers. ***.\u2019 United States v. Barone (C.C.A.2), 330 F.2d 543, at 545.\u201d State v. Bethel<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 3020, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 2550 (5th Dist. June 13, 2011). [This one bothers me because people can make this stuff up and call the police. The defendant was talking on a cell phone when he came out of the house. Where was the reasonable suspicion? I don’t see it. This is all too convenient. This is just wrong.]<\/p>\n

Defendant and his wife signed a parole agreement that they were subject to warrantless searches. The police received a report defendant was growing marijuana in his basement, so the parole officer could search. State v. Bays<\/a>, 2011 Ohio 3021, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 2551 (5th Dist. June 13, 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5704","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5704","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5704"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5704\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5704"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5704"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5704"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}