NJ: The emergency aid exception is based on objective known facts, not hindsight

Casino and police received a report of a hotel room robbery in Atlantic City, and the officer called for SWAT backup. The officers went to the floor where the robbery occurred, and they entered a room when there was no answer. The trial court erred in requiring the officer to review all the security footage before making the determination to enter. “Responding to an armed robbery at a hotel, the police faced a potentially volatile and dangerous situation — a suspected gunman on the loose who may have injured or was presently threatening other patrons or staff. The officers did not have time for a fact-gathering process suitable to a trial or for sustained reflection or deliberation. The perilous and exigent circumstances required prompt action based on the credible information at hand. [¶] We conclude that the trial court erred by viewing the events through the distorting lens of hindsight rather than viewing those events as they appeared to an objectively reasonable police officer who had to make immediate decisions in the face of a credible threat to the safety and lives of others. Based on the evidence presented at the suppression hearing, the police acted within the scope of the emergency-aid exception to the warrant requirement.” State v. Hathaway, 2015 N.J. LEXIS 817 (August 4, 2015).