Police officers make building
searches on a routine basis
and for a variety of reasons





Prowler calls
Burglary
Alarm drops
Buildings found open on patrol
Residence and business checks
for homeowners or business
owners
Building searches can
be dangerous



They can become routine
They can be performed too
quickly
They can be performed
haphazardly
 Due to time restraints
 Insufficient number of
officers to conduct the search
Whether an officer
thinks a suspect is in
the building or not,
the search should
always be conducted
as if a suspect were
in the structure!
Building Searches



There are no guarantees
Never become complacent
Searching a building is a
practiced skill
 Use every opportunity
to practice the skill
 Work with your partner
to develop cohesion
SPO #1-ACTIONS WHICH AN
OFFICER SHOULD NEVER TAKE
DURING A BUILDING SEARCH





NEVER STOP IN DOORWAYS
NEVER LINGER IN AN OPEN
AREA OR LONG HALL
NEVER BACK-LIGHT YOURSELF
OR YOUR PARTNER
NEVER LEAD THE WAY WITH
YOUR FIREARM
NEVER MOVE ANY FASTER
THAN YOU CAN SHOOT
ACCURATELY
SPO #2-ACTIONS WHICH AN
OFFICER SHOULD TAKE DURING
A BUILDING SEARCH





USE AVAILABLE COVER
MOVE FROM COVER TO COVER
BE AWARE OF SHADOWS AND
REFLECTIONS THAT INDICATE YOUR
PRESENCE
SEARCH A ROOM THOROUGHLY
BE READY WITH YOUR FIREARM
SPO #3-FOUR CRITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS FOR
SUCCESSFUL SEARCHES




HOW AND WHEN MOVEMENT IS
TO BE MADE
USE OF AVAILABLE SPACE
COVER AND CONCEALMENT
AWARENESS AND
OBSERVATION
Search and Seizure
Considerations Related to
Building Searches



Plain View
Exigent Circumstances
Hot Pursuit
HARRIS v. UNITED
STATES 1990 3-part test
1.
2.
3.
OFFICERS MUST BE LEGALLY ON
THE PREMISES FROM WHERE THE
OBSERVATION IS MADE
THE INCRIMINATING NATURE OF
THE ITEM MUST BE IMMEDIATELY
APPARENT
OFFICERS MUST HAVE A LAWFUL
RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE
OBJECT
1. Officers who observe
marijuana growing in a window of a
house while they are legally
standing on the sidewalk have no
right to make a warrantless entry
into the house
2. If officers are already lawfully
present in the house and could see
the marijuana from their location,
they could seize the marijuana
Exigent Circumstances



Warrantless search of premises is
legal so long as officers know that
suspects are in the process of
destroying evidence or contraband
However, even if the officer is
justified in entering premises, an
extensive search should not be
conducted without a warrant
Secure the premises, persons
involved, and a search warrant
Brigham City v. Stuart
126 S. Ct. 1943 (2006)
Police officers responded to a complaint
regarding a loud party at a residence. At the
scene, they heard shouting from inside and
observed juveniles drinking alcohol in the
backyard. The officers went into the backyard
and observed a physical disturbance
occurring in the kitchen of the home. A
juvenile suspect punched an adult victim in
the face.
An officer opened the screen door to the
kitchen and announced his presence, though
nobody noticed.
Brigham City v. Stuart
126 S. Ct. 1943 (2006)
The officer entered the kitchen and again
stated his presence, at which time the
altercation ceased. The officers arrested
several adults for contributing to the
delinquency of a minor, disorderly conduct,
and intoxication.
ISSUE: Whether the officers may gain access
to the premises under the emergency scene
exception if their subjective intent was to
enter for the purposes of affecting an arrest?
Brigham City v. Stuart
126 S. Ct. 1943 (2006)
USSC Held: The officers‘ subjective
intent for entering the premises is
irrelevant.
The Court, therefore, held that ―”law
enforcement officers may enter a home
without a warrant to render emergency
assistance to an injured occupant or to
protect an occupant from imminent
injury.”
Brigham City v. Stuart
126 S. Ct. 1943 (2006)
It therefore does not matter here--even
if their subjective motives could be so
neatly unraveled--whether the officers
entered the kitchen to arrest
respondents and gather evidence
against them or to assist the injured
and prevent further violence.
The test is “objectively reasonable”, not
subjective!
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
Police officers responded to a complaint of a
disturbance
A couple directed them to a residence where
a man was "going crazy"
Officers found a household in considerable
chaos: a pickup truck in the driveway with its
front smashed, damaged fence posts along
the side of the property, and three broken
house windows, the glass still on the ground
outside
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
Officers also noticed blood on the hood
of the pickup and on clothes inside of it,
as well as on one of the doors to the
house
Through a window, the officers could
see respondent, Jeremy Fisher, inside
the house, screaming and throwing
things. The back door was locked, and
a couch had been placed to block the
front door.
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
They saw that Fisher had a cut on his hand,
and they asked him whether he needed
medical attention. Fisher ignored these
questions and demanded, with accompanying
profanity, that the officers go to get a search
warrant
Officer Goolsby then pushed the front door
partway open and ventured into the house.
Through the window of the open door he saw
Fisher pointing a long gun at him. Officer
Goolsby withdrew
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
Fisher was charged under Michigan law with
assault with a dangerous weapon and
possession of a firearm during the
commission of a felony
"searches and seizures inside a home without
a warrant are presumptively unreasonable"
However, law enforcement officers "may
enter a home without a warrant to render
emergency assistance to an injured occupant
or to protect an occupant from imminent
injury."
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
This "emergency aid exception" does
not depend on the officers' subjective
intent or the seriousness of any crime
they are investigating when the
emergency arises
It requires only "an objectively
reasonable basis for believing“ that "a
person within [the house] is in need of
immediate aid"
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
It would be objectively reasonable to
believe that Fisher's projectiles might
have a human target (perhaps a spouse
or a child), or that Fisher would hurt
himself in the course of his rage.
In short, we find it as plain here as we
did in Brigham City that the officer's
entry was reasonable under the Fourth
Amendment.
MICHIGAN v. FISHER, 2009
Officers do not need ironclad proof of "a likely
serious, life-threatening" injury to invoke the
emergency aid exception.
Moreover, even if the failure to summon
medical personnel conclusively established that
Goolsby did not subjectively believe, that
Fisher or someone else was seriously injured
(which is doubtful), the test, as we have said,
is NOT what Officer Goolsby believed, but
whether there was "an objectively reasonable
basis for believing" that medical assistance
was needed, or persons were in danger
Hot Pursuit
The concept of Hot Pursuit was
established by case law in 1975 United
States v. Santana
Officers attempted warrantless felony
arrest of Ms. Santana in a public place
She ran into her house to escape them
They followed her into the house and
affected the arrest
Court held that as the arrest process
began in a public place the officers were
in Hot Pursuit as they entered the house
Limitations exist, depending
on the situation




Hot pursuit is terminated when officer
breaks off pursuit and waits for back-up
In STATE V. HABLUTZEL , the officer
attempted to arrest on a misdemeanor
in the hallway of an apartment
The suspect ran inside the apartment
The officer waited for several minutes
for back-up before entering the
apartment
Safety Factors to be
Considered Prior to Making
a Building Search




Advise the dispatcher that you will
be entering the building to search
Turn your radio off - containment
will be your communication
Maintain noise discipline by securing
keys, change, pens, badges, etc.
Remember disadvantages of
wearing your hat
Safety Factors to be
Considered Prior to Making
a Building Search




Have a functional flashlight, even
for daytime searches
Check other necessary equipment
Mirrors, Rope or bungee cord to tie
doors open
Choose a safe entry point - broken
windows should be avoided
3
4
2
1
6 7 8 9 10
1 2
45
The “FATAL FUNNEL”
Button Hook
Slicing
the Pie
Slicing the Pie
60% MINIMUM
MOVE HARD TO CORNER
PAST CENTER ROOM
SPO #4-THREE MAIN REASONS
FOR USING COVER DURING A
BUILDING SEARCH



TO EVALUATE THE SITUATION
TO DETERMINE THE IDENTITY
OF THE SUSPECT, CIVILIANS
AND FELLOW OFFICERS
FOR SELF-PROTECTION
TACTICAL SUGGESTIONS
USE COVER WHENEVER POSSIBLE
SELECT COVER CAREFULLY
NEVER CHANGE YOUR COVER FOR
SAKE OF CHANGING
SELECT NEXT POSITION BEFORE
YOU MOVE
NEVER MOVE FROM COVER WITH
A PARTIALLY LOADED WEAPON,
RELOAD BEFORE YOU MOVE
TACTICAL SUGGESTIONS
WHEN SHOOTING FROM COVER,
UNDERSTAND THE
RELATIONSHIP
BETWEENYOURSELF, YOUR
COVER, YOUR WEAPON, AND
SUSPECT’S LOCATION
DON’T USE COVER FOR
SUPPORT
FIRE AND LOOK AROUND THE
COVER, NOT OVER THE COVER
TACTICAL SUGGESTIONS
DO NOT LOOK OR FIRE FROM
COVER IN THE SAME POSITION
MORE THAN ONCE
DO NOT EXPOSE YOURSELF ANY
MORE THAN NECESSARY
WHEN SHOOTING FROM THE
WEAK SIDE OF YOUR COVER, USE
WEAK SIDE TECHNIQUES, NOT
STRONG SIDE