Man Stands His Ground- Fourth Amendment Video. LEO Input Please

[Goodman]

In particular, I'm curious what standards define exigent circumstances. Are LEOs required to explain themselves before entry based on exigent circumstances?
Video= 2:47
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CZh9xumD1cQ

[Kadmos]

It's a "reasonable person" test.

Would a reasonable person think that a life was in danger, property was going to be destroyed, evidence was going to be destroyed, or a fleeing suspect is on the premises.

No, LEO's are not required to explain themselves before entry. They are supposed to identify themselves as a police officer verbally, and after the fact with proper identification.

The idea of exigent circumstances is that more harm would be done by waiting for a warrant. There has to be a need for some urgency.

The classic examples are firemen entering a burning structure, or a woman screaming for help.

Obviously it would be bad if firemen, who are usually employees of the state, had to get a warrant before being able to go in.

Same for a woman screaming...LEO's don't need to explain that there are exigent circumstances to the six guys gang raping her before they enter

[skorpion]

Kad summed it up well. I will add to that by stating that officers must be able to clearly articulate (in their report and to supervisors) as to what exigent circumstances existed to solidify entering private property without a warrant or consent. In the video above, a reasonable person would believe that there was no exigent circumstance present for the officers to enter the video man's home. That would have changed if they clearly observed the suspect through a window or open door or heard screaming or a physical altercation taking place inside.

As an LEO myself, I must note that the hefty guy needs some remedial training on professionalism and how to talk to someone during a consensual encounter. One will be hard-pressed to garner much cooperation with a "higher-than-thou" attitude like that. Not to mention it's the handful of guys like that who cause a large number of people to think that all cops are the devil's spawn.

[TEN-32]

I'm not sure what was going on fully in the video, but "fresh pursuit" or "hot pursuit" are valid justification to enter the apartment. If they had solid information that a fugitive was inside there are a number of things they could have done better/differently. If the fugitive was wanted for felonies, it would have been easy to secure a warrant. At minimum I would have verified the guy at the door was the lease holder and that the actual tenants were not tied up in a bedroom.

[Goodman]

Thanks guys. I had a good idea Kadmos was on track but was looking for a more firsthand 'boots on the ground' perspective. We clearly don't know the details surrounding video encounter, but it opens questions in my mind as to where the line lies between saying no, you can't come in and them saying 'oh yes we will'. Ultimately I guess (and correct me if there are exceptions) an officer must justify his warrantless search in his report or some similar after-action review.

[skorpion]

Ultimately I guess (and correct me if there are exceptions) an officer must justify his warrantless search in his report or some similar after-action review.
Correct. Every action a police officer takes must be articulated as to why it was done. That is why report-writing takes up a good chunk of a shift. Even a five-minute encounter that results in an arrest can take an hour to write-up.

For example, in my department, our policy states that we may not discharge a firearm outside of the firing range unless certain conditions exist (defense of self and others, etc.). As a result, if I get dispatched to a wounded deer flopping around in the middle of the road and I euthanize it with my side arm, I have to type up a thorough report explaining why I discharged my firearm outside of the firing range.

[Goodman]

Ten-32 I appreciate the explanation of wanting to ID the guy at the door. Had that been explained, the resident may have conceded and shown his DL. Of course, it's not always best to explain every detail of what's on your mind.
That said, I have to say to Skorpion that a level of professionalism DOES make a huge difference, and I appreciate where you are coming from. When I was young I was pulled over and the officer was very controlled in asking me to let my hands be seen. I was so impressed with his manner I called dispatch to say so. Sadly, if the same situation arose today I really doubt it would have been as smooth.

[TEN-32]

Ten-32 I appreciate the explanation of wanting to ID the guy at the door. Had that been explained, the resident may have conceded and shown his DL. Of course, it's not always best to explain every detail of what's on your mind.
That said, I have to say to Skorpion that a level of professionalism DOES make a huge difference, and I appreciate where you are coming from. When I was young I was pulled over and the officer was very controlled in asking me to let my hands be seen. I was so impressed with his manner I called dispatch to say so. Sadly, if the same situation arose today I really doubt it would have been as smooth.

Sure. I mean SOMETHING led them to that particular door. They weren't just driving around the apartment complex and randomly picking a door to knock on to harass the residents, right? So whatever it was that caused them to knock on that door apparently did not rise to the level of exigency that would have allowed a warrantless search of the residence. Lots of info missing from the video so its difficult to assess.

[skorpion]

Sure. I mean SOMETHING led them to that particular door. They weren't just driving around the apartment complex and randomly picking a door to knock on to harass the residents, right? So whatever it was that caused them to knock on that door apparently did not rise to the level of exigency that would have allowed a warrantless search of the residence. Lots of info missing from the video so its difficult to assess.
I think I heard the officer on the right say that a witness observed the perpetrator enter the apartment complex on that side of the building. That's about the only detail I was able to extrapolate from the video that led the officers to that particular apartment.

[Goodman]

whatever it was that caused them to knock on that door apparently did not rise to the level of exigency that would have allowed a warrantless search of the residence.

^ This fleshes out some of what I was asking also. I inferred from what was shown this was the case, and apparently the resident's actions didn't raise the bar either. Where it got muddied for me was in the deputy's insistence on permission to enter, though as you point out if a point of reasonable suspicion were reached the deputy would stop asking and enter.

[Goodman]

I think I heard the officer on the right say that a witness observed the perpetrator enter the apartment complex on that side of the building. That's about the only detail I was able to extrapolate from the video that led the officers to that particular apartment.

Yes I caught something like that also. In fact I thought he said the witness saw suspect enter the apartment they were at.
So if that were the case they would likely have had reasonable suspicion.
If they were lying and entered without permission, and the resident could bring the witness to say she had NOT said that, bad news for the deputies.

[LAGC]

In particular, I'm curious what standards define exigent circumstances. Are LEOs required to explain themselves before entry based on exigent circumstances?
Video= 2:47
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CZh9xumD1cQ

The comments on that video are comedy gold.

(And I thought I had an issue with cops, damn... :lool: )

[Krupski]

In particular, I'm curious what standards define exigent circumstances. Are LEOs required to explain themselves before entry based on exigent circumstances?
Video= 2:47
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CZh9xumD1cQ

Everything would have gone a lot better and more smoothly if the cops simply and calmly told the guy what they were looking for (a wanted felon).

The minute they start interrupting, yelling and demanding, they lose any chance of the homeowner being cooperative.

Years ago, I left a store and headed back towards my car. Two cops walked up and asked me if "I saw anyone - possibly carrying a bookbag". I told them that I didn't, then they asked if I would mind if they looked inside my car and underneath it. I said "sure, go ahead". They looked in the front and back seat with a flashlight through the closed windows, looked under the car, then said "OK thank you" and walked to the next car.

They were calm and polite and I had no problem with them looking for whoever they were looking for.

But if they had the attitude that the cops in the video had, I would have told them "screw off - get a warrant".

A little bit of "nice" goes a long way when dealing with people.

[Krupski]

(1) I'm not sure what was going on fully in the video, but "fresh pursuit" or "hot pursuit" are valid justification to enter the apartment. If they had solid information that a fugitive was inside there are a number of things they could have done better/differently.

(2) At minimum I would have verified the guy at the door was the lease holder and that the actual tenants were not tied up in a bedroom.

(1) That same "justification" could be used by crooks dressed up as cops claiming that they are in "hot pursuit". How is anyone supposed to know if they are real cops?

(2) How would the home owner prove he is the home owner? When I read what you said, I thought about it - "what if it were me?" and I don't know how I could "prove" that I own the house.

I've got bills and mail (mostly bills :) ) with my name on them... my wife knows where the "formal" deed is stored (I don't).

How does one "prove" they are the actual owners? Or for tenants, how do they "prove" they are legitimately renting? I'm sure they don't carry a copy of their lease in their pocket.

[Richard Simmons]

(1) That same "justification" could be used by crooks dressed up as cops claiming that they are in "hot pursuit". How is anyone supposed to know if they are real cops?

(2) How would the home owner prove he is the home owner? When I read what you said, I thought about it - "what if it were me?" and I don't know how I could "prove" that I own the house.

I've got bills and mail (mostly bills :) ) with my name on them... my wife knows where the "formal" deed is stored (I don't).

How does one "prove" they are the actual owners? Or for tenants, how do they "prove" they are legitimately renting? I'm sure they don't carry a copy of their lease in their pocket.

I could just show them my monthly mortgage statement and DL.

[TEN-32]

(1) That same "justification" could be used by crooks dressed up as cops claiming that they are in "hot pursuit". How is anyone supposed to know if they are real cops?

(2) How would the home owner prove he is the home owner? When I read what you said, I thought about it - "what if it were me?" and I don't know how I could "prove" that I own the house.

I've got bills and mail (mostly bills :) ) with my name on them... my wife knows where the "formal" deed is stored (I don't).

How does one "prove" they are the actual owners? Or for tenants, how do they "prove" they are legitimately renting? I'm sure they don't carry a copy of their lease in their pocket.

1. That ruse has been used. In this area it is mostly used by hispanics on other hispanics. Rarely are the imposters uniformed...in fact I can't recall a situation where they weren't plainclothes with some fake badges. There have been imposters in uniforms making traffic stops.

2. A driver's license has an address on it if it is updated as required within 30 days of moving. The police records management system often has data on subjects from any previous police contact of any type...parking ticket or what not. If its a home the city maintains water billing records. That was an apartment though, so the management office may be of some help if all else fails.

[Krupski]

I could just show them my monthly mortgage statement and DL.LOL I don't have a mortgage payment! What now?

[ready]

Have a picture of you and your old lady on the wall?

Is your vehicle in your name and address?