Police officer’s entry into his own mother’s home was private entry or by ongoing consent

Police officer not in uniform or on duty entered his own mother’s home because he knew that his daughter was upset. He tried to call on the phone there to get a patrol car to come, but that wasn’t working, so he went to his own house and got his own patrol car and came back. He acted as a private citizen in the entry, and he had apparent authority to enter whenever he wanted into his mother’s home. State v. Scott, 975 So. 2d 782 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2008):

The record shows that Deputy Scott went to his mother’s house to find out why his 4-year-old daughter was upset. He did not wear his uniform, drive his patrol car, notify his office, or take a radio. His actions in entering the home are consistent with a concerned father attempting to address a private inter-family issue. Deputy Scott did not collect any physical evidence while inside the home. Moreover, after learning of the circumstances involving a serious danger to others, Deputy Scott acted responsibly by calling the sheriff’s office. He tried unsuccessfully to have the sheriff’s office send another deputy to the house to handle the matter. Deputy Scott had to use the house phone to make the call as he did not bring a police radio or cell phone. When he was advised that there were no other deputies in the area, Deputy Scott went back to his home to switch to his patrol car. It is clear that Scott’s primary objective in entering the house pertained to his children’s well-being rather than law enforcement.

Deputy Scott’s personal motivation supports the trial court’s and this court’s conclusion that he acted as a private citizen and not as a government agent when he entered his mother’s home.

Moreover, Deputy Scott’s entry into his own mother’s home was not unreasonable. The evidence adduced does not establish that defendant had a subjective expectation of privacy to preclude his own brother from entering their mother’s house (a house in which Scott used to reside) or that such expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable and legitimate in this unique situation. See, State v. Horton, 42,199 (La. App. 2d Cir. 06/20/07), 962 So. 2d 459. Deputy Scott testified that he frequently entered the house without knocking and called out for his brother or mother, and he was never precluded from doing the same. Even on this particular occasion, defendant did not ask Deputy Scott to leave but voluntarily engaged in conversation with his brother in the house. The evidence also shows that defendant had equal authority to enter Deputy Scott’s trailer just down the road. The totality of the circumstances compels a finding that the entry was not illegal under the particular circumstances of this case.

Traffic stop revealed evidence of a clan lab in the back seat, and this was justified by plain view because its nature was immediately apparent to the officer. State v. Linn, 975 So. 2d 771 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2008)* (Comment: This was an argument that defense counsel would not make and appellant made it pro se.)