\u201cUpon 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 \u2018there 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.\u2019 These assertions do not support the application of the emergency doctrine, which is to be construed \u2018narrowly,\u2019 to justify the officer’s entry and search of the apartment, to ascertain that a \u2018substantial threat of imminent danger\u2019 to the dogs may have existed \u2026.\u201d People v. Hunter, 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 705 (2d Dept. Feb. 18, 2022) (unpublished).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe 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.\u201d United States v. Hawkins, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35754 (E.D.Ky. Feb. 7, 2022).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u201cUpon 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 … Continue reading