NY Kings: 911 call 6 dogs in Manhattan apt were uncared for not exigency for warrantless entry

“Upon a review of the record, we find that the evidence adduced at the hearing did not establish the existence of facts sufficient to provide the police officer with reasonable grounds to believe that an emergency existed which required the immediate need for police assistance. The officer knew only that a 911 caller had stated that ‘there were six dogs in the apartment that were not being taken care of, they were not being fed, and there was dog feces, as well [as] garbage, in the apartment.’ These assertions do not support the application of the emergency doctrine, which is to be construed ‘narrowly,’ to justify the officer’s entry and search of the apartment, to ascertain that a ‘substantial threat of imminent danger’ to the dogs may have existed ….” People v. Hunter, 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 705 (2d Dept. Feb. 18, 2022) (unpublished).

“The fact that both trial counsel and appellate counsel did not succeed on the Fourth Amendment challenge despite their fervent efforts speaks more to the merits of the challenge than to counsel’s performance.” United States v. Hawkins, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35754 (E.D.Ky. Feb. 7, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Emergency / exigency, Ineffective assistance, Issue preclusion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.