WV: State did not justify “officer safety” as reason for entry

The state failed to justify the entry here on officer safety grounds because their neighbor disturbance call included no reference to potential violence or threats and no good reason could be articulated other than “officer safety” which essentially is always a concern. Plain view suppressed. Also, Fourth Amendment standing is not jurisdictional, and the state waives it by not asserting it in the trial court. State v. Ward, 2023 W. Va. LEXIS 474 (Nov. 9, 2023). Update: See techdirt: WV Supreme Court: Omnipresent Concern Like ‘Officer Safety’ Can’t Be Used To Excuse Constitutional Violations by Tim Cushing

Defendant’s state constitutional claim that exit orders under the Fourth Amendment and Mimms should be subject to a broader rule under the state constitution wasn’t decided despite his requests. Remanded for that. Davis v. State, 2023 Del. LEXIS 376 (Nov. 8, 2023).*

There was reasonable suspicion for defendant’s stop and frisk based on information from an informant somewhat corroborated and then their own observations. State v. Gilbert, 2023 La. App. LEXIS 1860 (La. App. 5 Cir Nov. 8, 2023).*

This entry was posted in Informant hearsay, Plain view, feel, smell, Protective sweep, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.