Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

Exigency — Hot Pursuit — Entry of Residence — Arrest of 3rd Party

State v. Michael J. Kryzaniak/Sherry L. Kryzaniak, 2001 WI App 44
For Kryzaniak: Raymond G. Meyer II

Issue: Whether warrantless entry of a residence to arrest a third party was justified by the exigent circumstance of hot pursuit.

Holding:

¶18 … (T)here was no immediate or continuous pursuit of a suspect from the scene of a crime; thus, there was no hot pursuit and no exigent circumstances.… There was no pursuit here, only a day-long investigation of Anderson’s whereabouts. The police were at the Kryzaniak residence as the result of an investigation, not a police chase.

¶21 Our reluctance to find exigent circumstances is especially appropriate when the underlying offense for which there is probable cause to arrest is relatively minor. Welsh, 466 U.S. at 750.… ¶22 Consequently, the nature of the underlying offense is an important factor to be considered in the exigent circumstances calculus. Id. at 751. Most courts addressing this issue have disallowed warrantless home arrests for nonfelonious crimes. Id. at 752.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail

{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment