NCJ Number
103289
Journal
Syracuse Law Review Volume: 37 Issue: 1 Dated: (1986) Pages: 147-179
Date Published
1986
Length
33 pages
Annotation
The fourth amendment prohibits police from making a warrantless and nonconsensual entry into a suspect's home unless they can establish that an exigency justified taking immediate action.
Abstract
The U.S. Supreme Court has provided little guidance concerning the definition and validation of the underlying exigency. While the courts have not produced a working description of circumstances that justify circumventing the warrant requirement, some courts have held that officers may not rely on exigencies they have created by their own actions. Despite this, police do, in practice, often create circumstances that necessarily give rise to an exigency, and courts have often been unwilling to invalidate the subsequent entry. Generally courts have relied on generalized exceptions to the warrant requirement in circumstances where inaction might contribute to destruction of evidence, flight of the suspect, or danger to police or public. More specific standards or guidelines are needed for determining the validity of exigencies that police contribute to creating. Factual considerations in validating alleged exigencies could include the extent of control police have over events leading to an exigency, the timeframe involved, and the foreseeability of the exigency at time the arrest decision was made and how soon thereafter a warrant could have been obtained. 297 notes.