Policy Text
TRAINING BULLETIN
Evaluation Coordinator: BOI Deputy Chief
Automatic Revision Cycle: 3 Years
partment Training Bulletins shall be used to advise members of current police techniques and
procedures and shall constitute official policy.” Index Number: I-F.6
Alpha Index: Ramey / Steagald Warrants Effective Date:
4 Nov 09
“De
RAMEY/STEAGALD WARRANTS
Definition :
Ramey Warrant
A Ramey Warrant is signed by a magistrate, based upon probable cause, allowing a peace officer
to enter the home of the arrestee for the purpose of taking them into custody.1 A Ramey Warrant
does not challenge the legality of the arrest, only the entry into the house.
In the case of People v. Ramey (16 Cal. 3d 263) , the California Supreme Court ruled that, in the
absence of exigent circumstances, an arrest warrant or consent, officers may not enter the home of
a suspect for the purpose of arresting them.
Officers must comply with Ramey when:
1. They enter a home, AND
2. Their purpose is to arrest a resident.
Steagald Warrant
A Steagald Warrant is:
1. A warrant of arrest, and
2. A warrant to search for the arrestee in the home of a person other than the arrestees.
In Steagald v. United States, the United States Su preme Court ruled that o fficers may not enter the
home of a suspect’s relative, friend, or other third party for the purpose of arresting the suspect
unless they have a search warrant.2
“Do not Violate Ramey”
Officers may not enter a home to affect an arrest me rely because probable cause exists to arrest. If
the suspect is located inside a residence, an arre st or search warrant, the consent of a permissible
occupant, or exigent circumstances must also exist. Ramey warrants are probable cause warrants
that are obtained before, or in lieu of a complaint warrant.
1 CAL: P v. Ramey (1976) 16 C3 263, 275
2 USSC: Steagald v. US (1981) 451 US 204
2
Ramey/Steagald Warrants, Index Number I-F.6
Exceptions : A warrant is not required to enter a residence or other structure for arresting a person
inside under any of the following circumstances:
• Hot Pursuit – The physical chase of a suspect.
• Fresh Pursuit – An “investigatory” pursuit where officers are ac tively attempting to apprehend
the suspect. Fresh pursuits do no t require a physical chase.
Consent
Although Ramey warrants sometimes contain the suspect’s la st known address, this is merely an
aid to locating the suspect— it does not constitute authorization to enter that residence.
Prior to entering a residence to execute an arrest based on a Ramey warrant, officers must have
probable cause to believe:
1. The suspect lives inside the residence, and
2. He or she is presently inside.
If probable cause exists that a suspect is inside of a residence, officers must also determine if the
residence is the suspect’s or another persons. If the residence is not th e suspect’s, and exceptions
to Ramey do not exist, then officers must have a Steagald warrant prior to entry.
The following are suggested considerations in determining whether a suspect is inside the house
upon execution of a Ramey warrant:
1. Listed Address
• It was the suspect’s last known address.
• Suspect was receiving mail at the address.
• Utilities at the address were listed to the suspect.
• Suspect listed the address on a credit card application.
• Suspect listed the address on a vehicle repair work order.
• Suspect listed the address on DMV records.
• Suspect listed the address when booked recently.
• Suspect gave the address when he was recently given a traffic ticket.
• It was the most current address on the suspect’s probation or parole records.
• Suspect’s phone number was listed to that address.
• Hotel registration listed the suspect as an occupant of the room.
2. Suspect on the premises
• Suspect was seen at or near the residence.
• Suspect’s car was parked at or near the residence.
• Suspect’s trailer was parked adjacent to the house.
• Cars belonging to the suspect’s known associat es were regularly parked in the driveway
or nearby.
• Officers saw the suspect unlock a do or to the residence and enter.
• Officers saw the suspect taking the garbage out of the house, bringing in the laundry, or
visiting with neighbors.
• Officers telephoned the residence and spoke with the suspect.
• Officers met with the suspect at the residence on one or more occasions.
• Officers saw the suspect leaving the house at 7:30 A.M. with his wife and child.
3
4 Nov 09 ● Oakland Police Department
3. Information from suspect or others
• Suspect told an officer he was “staying” at the house and could be contacted there.
• Suspect said he was “staying with” the homeowner.
• An apartment manager or motel desk cler k identified the suspect as the occupant.
• A reliable informant said the suspect was living at the house.
• Two or more untested informants, acting independently, said the suspect lived there.
• An untested informant said the suspect was living there, plus there was some
corroboration.
• Neighbors or household staff iden tified the suspect as a resident.
• Suspect’s wife, child, or