Constitutional Law

Armed Standoff Warrant Enough, Ninth Circuit Narrowly Concludes

One October evening in 1999, after watching the World Series, cleaning his antique firearms and drinking rather heavily, Steven Fisher approached the security guard at his San Jose, California apartment building. With a gun in tow, he slurred descriptions of his upstairs neighbors, alternately calling them nice people and vampires, prompting to the security guard to call the police.

After Fisher threatened to shoot them, police surrounded Fisher's apartment, initiating a standoff that continued for 12 hours. The issue before an en banc panel of the 9^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently was whether Fisher had a right to sue the police for failing to obtain a warrant before arresting him the following afternoon.

In a 6-5 decision, the court upheld the police action. For the majority, Judge Richard Tallman wrote that, 'Implicit in Fisher's argument is the following premise: … the passage of time may operate to liberate [a] suspect, rekindle the arrest warrant requirement and require police to assess with each passing minute whether the circumstances remain exigent. We reject this premise.'

In dissent, Judge Stephen Reinhardt critiqued the majority's 'lack of respect' for the Fourth Amendment.' Reinhardt noted that the standoff went on for so long that some officers returned to the office to write reports.

Full post as published by ACS Blog on March 12, 2009 (boomark / email).