Background: Generally searches require a warrant … unless it is reasonable for the police to search without a warrant. If taking the time to obtain a warrant would result in an escape, risk of death, or loss of evidence, then such circumstances are generally considered an “exigent circumstance” which does not require a warrant. However, if the exigent entry is to be made into a home, then the underlying offense must be a serious crime. In the case of Welsh v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court found it unreasonable to enter a home to for a civil DUI offense where the exigency was the dissipation of the suspect’s blood alcohol level.
Legal Supplement
Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740 (1984),
[A]n important factor to be considered when determining whether any exigency exists is the gravity of the underlying offense for which the arrest is being made…[A]pplication of the exigent circumstances exception in the context of a home entry should rarely be sanctioned when there is probable cause to believe that only a minor offense … has been committed.
Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91 (1990),
[I]n the absence of hot pursuit, there must be at least probable cause to believe that one or ore of the other [exigent circumstances] factors justifying the entry were present and that in assessing the risk of danger, the gravity of the crime and likelihood that the suspect is armed should be considered.
Warden, Md. Penitentiary v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294 (1967),
The Fourth Amendment does not require police officers to delay in the course of an investigation if to do so would gravely endanger their lives or the lives of others.
Armijo ex rel. Armijo Sanchez v. Peterson, 601 F.3d 1065 (10th Cir. 2010),
The Fourth Amendment does not require officers to use the least restrictive means to investigate a threat.
U.S. v. Carter, 360 F.3d 1235 (10th Cir. 2004),
There are four requirements for a permissible warrantless entry when the police fear the imminent destruction of evidence. Such an entry must be (1) pursuant to clear evidence of probable cause, (2) available only for serious crimes and in circumstances where the destruction of evidence is likely, (3) limited in scope to the minimum intrusion necessary, and (4) supported by clearly defined indicators of exigency that are not subject to police manipulation or abuse.
U.S. v. Thomas, 372 F.3d 1173 (10th Cir. 2004),
In rise of personal danger cases, the basic aspects of the exigent circumstances exception are (1) the officers must have reasonable ground to believe that there is an imminent need to protect the lives or safety of themselves or others, (2) the search must not be motivated by an intent to arrest or seize evidence; and (3) there must be some reasonable basis, approaching probable cause, to associate the emergency with the place to be searched.
