ND: Opening door of a parked and running semi when driver didn’t wake up was to gather information and was unreasonable

“Thus, we conclude law enforcement was acting outside the scope of the community caretaking function when opening the semi door and stepping onto the running boards in an attempt to gather information without first attempting to get a response from outside of the vehicle. From this unlawful intrusion into Petersen’s vehicle, the officers were able to obtain information they would not otherwise have been able to obtain, such as the odor of alcohol emanating from Petersen and his bloodshot watery eyes. This warrantless trespass was an unreasonable search in violation of Petersen’s constitutional rights.” Under prong two of the inevitable discovery doctrine, the State must prove that the evidence would have been found without the unlawful activity and must show how the discovery of the evidence would have occurred. State v. Petersen, 2023 ND 155, 2023 N.D. LEXIS 157 (Aug. 17, 2023).

The affidavit for warrant was not materially false in stating that all the officers could smell marijuana on the premises during a protective sweep. Maybe not all but most actually did, so it’s not materially false. United States v. Bailey, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145302 (E.D. Tenn. July 14, 2023).*

“Plaintiffs do not point to, and this Court is not aware of, any Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit case law holding that an officer may not climb over a locked gate to conduct a knock and talk. Nor have a consensus of other circuits held the same.” Nidiffer v. Lovato, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145599 (D.N.M. Aug. 18, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Community caretaking function, Curtilage, Knock and talk, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.