Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

FL4: Robbery investigation exigency had dissipated; officer's entry was invalid

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Robbery victims’ apartment was entered without asking and without consent, and other evidence of crime was seen. There was no exigency to enter because the robbers were gone. Dixon v. State, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 8206 (Fla. App. 4DCA June 9, 2010): Most importantly, [Officer] Leitman did not testify that he suspected the robbery suspects were in the apartment as soon as he reached the apartment door. He became suspicious only after he entered the apartment without consent, saw evidence of the robbery, and observed Dixon nervous and agitated after disappearing to another room. These observations do not support Leitman's warrantless entry into the apartment prior to making the observations. We conclude that the exigency dissipated once Leitman received the initial description of the robbery from the victim who was out of harm's way, and, thereafter, from his conversation with Dixon and his girlfriend at the apartment door...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on June 12, 2010 (boomark / email).