Summary judgment denied in emergency search of house where emergency was dispelled
FourthAmendment.com:
In a civil case over an excessive protective sweep allegedly based on an emergency, the court denies the officer summary judgment because the sweep was excessive. Hunsberger v. Blessard, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51250 (W.D. Va. July 3, 2008):
Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the Hunsbergers with the above precepts in mind, the court concludes that even if Wood’s initial entry could be viewed as objectively reasonable, his findings once inside, at least before he entered the bedroom of the Hunsbergers’ daughter and probably before, should have dispelled any reasonable belief that an emergency, in fact, existed justifying further intrusion. Therefore, accepting the facts in the light most favorable to the Hunsbergers, the court concludes that Wood’s warrantless excursion into the Hunsbergers’ home exceeded the scope of the emergency and community caretaker doctrines and, therefore, was impermissible.
Defendant was stopped at a driver’s license checkpoint riding in a car. The driver’s license was expired, so the officer asked all passengers for their DL so one could drive. All had drug histories and one had an outstanding warrant. Consent was sought an obtained, and the consent was valid. United States v. Lesane, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51254 (E.D. Va. July 3, 2008).* (The court poses the question (”Consequently, ‘when an officer seeks to expand the investigation of a motorist beyond the reasons for the checkpoint, the officer must have a reasonable suspicion that the particular person seized is engaged in criminal activity or obtain consent during the time period the defendant is lawfully seized.’ [Brugal, 209 F.3d at 357].”) then fails to answer it except by stating a conclusion.)