{"id":7044,"date":"2012-05-28T21:20:01","date_gmt":"2012-04-28T11:16:34","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2012-04-28T11:16:34","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7044","title":{"rendered":"CA8: Police failed to show exigency justifying warrantless entry into hotel room"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Just because the defendant attempted to elude the police before, there was no exigency to enter a hotel room without a warrant because there was no evidence that the defendant knew the police were tailing him. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.ca8.uscourts.gov\/opndir\/12\/04\/103648P.pdf\">United States v. Ramirez<\/a>, 676 F.3d 755 (8th Cir. 2012):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;We review the district court&#8217;s findings of historical fact for clear error, but the ultimate determination of whether the facts as found constitute exigent circumstances is reviewed de novo.&#8221; United States v. Kuenstler, 325 F.3d 1015, 1021 (8th Cir. 2003). &#8220;The analysis of whether [the exigent circumstance] exception to the warrant requirement has been made out is an objective one &#8216;focusing on what a reasonable, experienced police officer would believe.'&#8221; Id. at 1021 (quoting In re Sealed Case 96-3167, 153 F.3d 759, 766, 332 U.S. App. D.C. 84 (D.C. Cir. 1998)). &#8220;[T]he police bear a heavy burden when attempting to demonstrate an urgent need that might justify warrantless searches or arrests.&#8221; Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 749-50, 104 S. Ct. 2091, 80 L. Ed. 2d 732 (1984). When the exigency at issue is destruction of evidence, police officers must demonstrate a sufficient basis for an officer to believe that somebody in the residence (or hotel room, in this case) will imminently destroy evidence. United States v. Clement, 854 F.2d 1116, 1119 (8th Cir. 1988).<\/p>\n<p>. . .<\/p>\n<p>Looking then at the remaining two bases for the district court&#8217;s analysis, the circumstances relied upon by the district court are not exigent. &#8220;The urgency that would justify allowing the police officers, rather than a neutral judicial officer, to draw the reasonable inferences supporting this entry is not present in these facts.&#8221; United States v. Duchi, 906 F.2d 1278, 1282 (8th Cir. 1990). At the time these officers attempted to enter room 220, they reasonably believed that two of the occupants of room 220 possessed heroin in their shoes, and the officers believed that the men had, possibly, attempted to elude the police either to flee themselves, which seems more tenable, or, more tenuously, to destroy the evidence at some point. That the officers tracked the men also does not impact our analysis. There is no evidence supporting the inference that these men knew the police were tracking them at all, which might lend credence to that line of reasoning as it relates to the imminent destruction of evidence. Also, knowledge that drugs were in the room does not suffice to conclude that destruction was imminent.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7044\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7044","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7044","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7044"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7044\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7044"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7044"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7044"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}