Warrantless Searches inside the Home

[RoyLDenton]

I would like to know what people think about the "threshold of the door" and the landmark case of Payton v New York. From my understanding of the law, the threshold is the firm line of the home and police cannot cross over into a home, or otherwise enter a home, search a home, sieze property from the home without a warrant, consent of exigent circumstances.

 

[justalayman]

what do you mean "what people think about..."?


for a student, that is a poor way to initiate a conversation or debate about anything. I would think you would pose something that would draw a person into commenting on the legality of some scenario.

 

[RoyLDenton]

I agree. I'm a first time user and I botched it up. With that said, "I think" that Payton v New York conclusively means that absent a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances, police cannot enter a person's home, period. "I think" that IF Payton is still in effect and has not been overturned (it hasn't) then "I think" we have a big problem stirring in the Eastern District of Tennessee. I also "think" that police view Payton as nothing more than words on a paper and district judges are evolving in the same direction. To my amazement, the Unpublished Opinion of Roy Denton v Steve Rievley (google it) is already being used as caselaw citation in Texas. The USCA for the 6th Cir. just ruled on this November 2009.

I didn't want to bog this thread down with this litigation which if my JNOV is denied then I naturally will appeal. If in some way the "privacy" concerns of a property owner, as well as the afforded protections in Payton, then a person who voluntarily exposes themselves to "public view" by having their door open allows police to enter the home because you voluntarily exposed yourself to the public.(new ground from Santana, Watson and related opinions)
I apoligize for the confusion my posts presented but my gist is to get feedback on just how can an open door and a person be standing upwards to 10 feet inside his/her home from that door BUT in "public view" because of the open door and police can see inside somehow now allows police to enter the home without a warrant, without consent and without exigent circumstances. Maybe the founders were correct in not creating a "privacy right" within the Fourth Amendment and we as a society are slowly going back to the days of no privacy unless you batten down the windows and doors. Sorry, I just refuse to live in a bubble.

 

[CdwJava]

As I understand it, Payton effectively states that the police cannot cross the threshold to enter the house absent some exigency, consent, or a warrant. If the police have probable cause to arrest you and you open the door and are standing in the threshold, they can put the habeas grabbus on you. However, if standing inside the room and not in the doorway, they would need some other (lawful) means to make entry before they could do so.

Note that a doorway can be considered a "public place" pursuant to McArthur (2001) 531 U.S. 326, 335.

Your state's laws and Circuit Court of Appeals may further modify these general rules, however.

 

[The Occultist]

Why are we helping a lazy college student do his homework assignment?

 

[BOR]

I agree. I'm a first time user and I botched it up. With that said, "I think" that Payton v New York conclusively means that absent a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances, police cannot enter a person's home, period. "I think" that IF Payton is still in effect and has not been overturned (it hasn't) then "I think" we have a big problem stirring in the Eastern District of Tennessee. I also "think" that police view Payton as nothing more than words on a paper and district judges are evolving in the same direction. To my amazement, the Unpublished Opinion of Roy Denton v Steve Rievley (google it) is already being used as caselaw citation in Texas. The USCA for the 6th Cir. just ruled on this November 2009.

The 5th circuit, which covers TX, is not bound by the Publishing rules for the 6th circuit.

Are YOU, by your username, saying you are the Denton in that case??

In an error is made in the application of 4th AM precedent, you have a right to appleal.

 

[CdwJava]

Why are we helping a lazy college student do his homework assignment?

We were bored ... and it was late (or I was weary) ... I was on autopilot.

 

[tranquility]

There is a circuit split on the issue. It's the same way in the ninth circuit per U.S. v. Vaneaton, 49 F.3d 1423 (9th Cir. 1995). It all gets to "reasonable". What is the reasonable expectation of privacy to that which is willingly exposed?