In Arizona, what are the guidelines for the police in a situation where a neighbor called the sheriff to report what they thought was domestic violence. Upon arrival, the officers announced that they needed to see the occupants of the apartments. Everyone was brought to the door for the visual inspection. There was no sign of blood or physical injury on any of the occupants which met the request. At that time the officers said they needed to look in the room the incident allegedly took place in. They were asked to produce a warrant at that time. The officer stated that a warrant was not needed to come in to check. They were asked three times to produce one but insisted on coming in. It was agreed that they could come in, walk down the hall to the room and do their inspection. During the time they were in the house, they entered other rooms and looked in other areas. Is this behavior within the parameters of what is acceptable or is it a violation of ones rights? The fear is that this technique could be used by any officer since the police are not required to reveal who reported the alleged incident. Thus, it would be entirely legal to enter any house in the country with this excuse, whether having received an actual call or not. Where does the line get drawn as far as discovery, searchable areas, etc. if this is allowed?
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
Arrest, Search, Seizure, Warrant What is legal police procedure?
- Thread Starter dillerboi
- Start date
- Status
Google "exigent circumstances".
jharris352
New Member
The investigation should have ended when all parties in the house are known to be safe. I suppose they could argue that the ones that came to the door could all be involved in a crime against another, but that's stretching it. I would say that they needed to get a search warrant. I would be interested in hearing from some of our resident police officers. I'm sure one or more of them will answer too.
mightymoose
Moderator
The reason they come in to check is because there may still be someone inside that did not come to the door. Domestic violence is a serious offense, and they don't want to walk away if someone there has been hurt and is being intimidated to not step forward. A report of domestic violence was made, and depending on the circumstances (what information was given by the person that made the report) they can make a check of the residence to be sure.
That said, the purpose of their search is to find any other occupants. If they start searching through your drawers and cabinets then they are being unreasonable since a person is not likely to be found in the drawers. If they should do so and find drugs, weapons, whatever... THEN your rights have been violated.
Note that the 4th Amendment does not say that a warrant is required to search. The 4th Amendment protects you from "unreasonable" searches and seizures. In this case, the police responded to a report of a possible crime and their need to check for any injured person needing assistance is quite reasonable, even if the information in the initial report was false. They are acting on the information they have at the time. It would actually be unreasonable for them to stop and start making phone calls and doing paperwork for a warrant if someone just got beat up inside and needs an ambulance.
**
Just to add a note: I have responded to a DV call where the woman answered the door and insisted nothing happened and she was home alone, but a subsequent check of the house turned up the guy hiding in the closet. In this case I checked the residence based on three things: 1. Prior DV history at that address, 2. The neighbor reported shouting and screaming, 3. Though the woman said she was home alone and I didn't see any injuries, the way she peeked through the door with fear in her eyes told me otherwise. It is not uncommon for victims of domestic violence to protect their abusers. Had I walked away and took that woman's word for it, my butt would be on the line if she turned up in the hospital an hour later. I had reason to believe a crime had just occurred and was well within my limits to go in and get the guy. It happens all the time.
That said, the purpose of their search is to find any other occupants. If they start searching through your drawers and cabinets then they are being unreasonable since a person is not likely to be found in the drawers. If they should do so and find drugs, weapons, whatever... THEN your rights have been violated.
Note that the 4th Amendment does not say that a warrant is required to search. The 4th Amendment protects you from "unreasonable" searches and seizures. In this case, the police responded to a report of a possible crime and their need to check for any injured person needing assistance is quite reasonable, even if the information in the initial report was false. They are acting on the information they have at the time. It would actually be unreasonable for them to stop and start making phone calls and doing paperwork for a warrant if someone just got beat up inside and needs an ambulance.
**
Just to add a note: I have responded to a DV call where the woman answered the door and insisted nothing happened and she was home alone, but a subsequent check of the house turned up the guy hiding in the closet. In this case I checked the residence based on three things: 1. Prior DV history at that address, 2. The neighbor reported shouting and screaming, 3. Though the woman said she was home alone and I didn't see any injuries, the way she peeked through the door with fear in her eyes told me otherwise. It is not uncommon for victims of domestic violence to protect their abusers. Had I walked away and took that woman's word for it, my butt would be on the line if she turned up in the hospital an hour later. I had reason to believe a crime had just occurred and was well within my limits to go in and get the guy. It happens all the time.
Last edited:
jharris352
New Member
I have a question Moose. If the person at the door denies you entry, can you force your way through or do you need a warrant at that point? It seems to me that you are saying if they denied you entry at that point that you could arrest them for Obstruction and continue into the house. Is that right?
mightymoose
Moderator
It really depends on the circumstances.
In this case, though they initially demanded a warrant (no telling how the conversation actually went), they did concede and allow entry. The purpose of the entry is to check for additional occupants that may be injured and the search must remain within that scope, though certainly anything in plain view may come into play.
In a case where the person at the door is denying entry and the police have reason to believe a crime has occurred and someone inside is injured and in need of help, then yes, they may still make entry and an arrest/detention for obstruction would not be out of the question (a detention might be more practical). As BayState mentioned above, this falls into exigent circumstances.
However, if the person is denying entry and there is not enough information to support a reasonable belief that a crime has occurred (say it was a 911 hangup instead of a neighbor reporting a fight and screaming), then yes, a warrant should be obtained if the police think something seems fishy.
A warrant is only a phone call away, but it still takes time and is not practical if time is of the essence (someone may need medical attention). The circumstances will determine how reasonable the warrantless search is.
In this case, though they initially demanded a warrant (no telling how the conversation actually went), they did concede and allow entry. The purpose of the entry is to check for additional occupants that may be injured and the search must remain within that scope, though certainly anything in plain view may come into play.
In a case where the person at the door is denying entry and the police have reason to believe a crime has occurred and someone inside is injured and in need of help, then yes, they may still make entry and an arrest/detention for obstruction would not be out of the question (a detention might be more practical). As BayState mentioned above, this falls into exigent circumstances.
However, if the person is denying entry and there is not enough information to support a reasonable belief that a crime has occurred (say it was a 911 hangup instead of a neighbor reporting a fight and screaming), then yes, a warrant should be obtained if the police think something seems fishy.
A warrant is only a phone call away, but it still takes time and is not practical if time is of the essence (someone may need medical attention). The circumstances will determine how reasonable the warrantless search is.
- Status
Share this page
