NCJ Number
87963
Journal
American Journal of Criminal Law Volume: 10 Issue: 1 Dated: (March 1982) Pages: 1-25
Date Published
1982
Length
25 pages
Annotation
This article reviews fourth amendment law regarding home searches and arrest entries prior to two recent Supreme Court cases, discusses the holdings in these cases, and analyzes the resulting disparity in the application of fourth amendment principles.
Abstract
The sanctity of privacy interests in the home has long been recognized by the Supreme Court. Absent exigent circumstances or consent of the owner, law enforcement authorities may not abrogate these interests by entering and searching an individual's home unless they have a valid search warrant. The recent decisions in Payton v. New York (1980) and Steagald v. United States (1981) significantly reaffirm the importance of residential privacy rights enunciated in the fourth amendment. The two cases eliminate much of the incongruity in the application of fourth amendment law to residential arrest entries. However, the Court did not create one uniform rule for protecting residential privacy interests in the variety of cases in which they are infringed. Instead, two different rules apply to these interests depending on the residency status of the arrest suspect. The decisions have not entirely clarified the issue of residential privacy in home arrest entries. Specifically, the Court did not consider whether in such a situation a home is the home of a third person or an arrest suspect. It is suggested that a uniform search warrant requirement best serves home privacy rights and law enforcement interests. Requiring a search warrant for all residential arrest entries initially would resolve the difficulties created by the recent Supreme Court decisions. The proper focus of judicial review in home arrest entries should be on an individual's privacy interests in the home, and not solely on the home as a special place under the fourth amendment. The article provides 153 footnotes.