GGPDE_2020-37_Hot_Pursuit_2170018

JACKIE LACEY DISTRICT ATTORNEY LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE ONEMINUTE BRIEF COPYRIGHT © 2020 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR NON -COMMERCIAL PROSECUTORIAL, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY . 1MB@da.lacounty.gov NUMBER : 2020-37 DATE : 10-29-20 BY: Devallis Rutledge TOPIC : Hot Pursuit ISSUE : When does the exception for “hot pursuit” allow police to make a warrantless entry into private premises to arrest a suspect? “Police officers may enter premises without a warrant when they are in hot pursuit of a fleeing suspect.” Kentucky v. King (2011) 563 US 452, 460. The exceptio n has several features. ● “Hot pursuit” and “fresh pursuit” are used interchangeably to refer to the same exception. People v. Superior Court (Dai -Re) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 86, 89. ● Although th is exception is sometimes mischaracterized as “hot pursuit of a fleeing felon ,” notice that the exception was stated in King, above, as applying to a “fleeing suspect ,” because there is “no principle of law which says a fresh pursuit can be carried on in the case of a felony but not a misdemeanor. ” People v. Lavoyne (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 154, 159 . This issue is pending further review at the US Supreme Court in Arthur Gregory Lange v. California, No. 20 -18. (Watch for a future 1MB on the decision in this case, once issued. ) ● If officers attempt a lawful detention or arrest while the suspect is in a public place , they may enter to complete the detention or arrest, regardless of the seriousness of the crime . “[A] suspect may not defeat an arrest which has been set in motion in a public place … by the expedient of escaping to a private place. ” US v. Santana (1976) 427 US 38, 43. See also, People v. Lloyd (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 1425, 1429 (entry OK in pursuit of a traffic - infraction suspect who parked and ran inside ); and see Stanton v. Sims (2013 ) 571 US 3, 8-9 (pursuit of a noise -complaint suspect into the curtilage , after officer’s street command, “Stop! Police ,” was held not to violate clearly -established Fourth Amendment law ). This information was current as of publication date. It is not intended as legal advice. It is recommended that readers check for subsequent developments, and consult legal advisors to ensure currency after publication. Local policies and procedures regarding application should be observed. LADA ONE -MINUTE BRIEF NO. 20 20-37 PAGE 2 ● On the other hand, if there has been no attempt to detain or arrest the suspect while s/he was in a public place, the “hot pursuit” exception permits entry only in cases where the suspect was (1) continuously pursued or tracked (2) from the scene of a (3) recently - committed , (4) dangerous crime, with the potential f or further (5) threat to public safety if s/he is not quickly apprehended. In such a case, it is not necessary that police have even laid eyes on the suspect before entry: “’[T]he claim of hot pursuit is unconvincing [whenever ] there was no immediate or continuous pursuit of the petitioner from the scene of a crime .” Welsh v. Wisconsin (1984) 466 US 740, 753 (disapprov ing entry to initiate arrest for a civil infraction ). “[F]resh pursuit of a fleeing suspect who has committed a grave offense and remains dangerous to life and limb may constitute exceptional circumstances… [A]lthough fresh pursuit of a fleeing [suspect] must be substantially continuous and afford the law enforcement authorities no reasonable opportunity to obtain a warrant, it is not necess ary that the suspect be kept physically in view at all times.” People v. Escudero (1979) 23 Cal.3d 800, 810 (entry OK where officers traced residential burglar from the scene to his residence within an hour, because burglary , which has a high potential for dangerous confrontation , is a grave offense). See also Warden v. Hayden (1967) 387 US 294, 298 -99 (entry OK “within minutes” after armed robber went into residence); People v. Johnson (1981) 30 Cal.3d 444, 452 (entry OK into suspect’s girlfriend’s residence 75 minutes after street shooting ); People v. Superior Court (Dai-Re), supra, 104 Cal.App.3d at 91 (entry OK whe re officers continuously tracked commercial burglars from the scene to the residence). ● Before making a “hot pursuit” entry, police mu st have “reasons to believe” the suspect is inside when entry is made. People v. White (1986