No. 20-7290

Michael Scott Hanuman v. United States

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-03-02
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure emergency-aid emergency-aid-doctrine fourth-amendment law-enforcement protective-sweep reasonable-suspicion search-and-seizure
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2021-03-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the Fourth Amendment permit law enforcement officers to conduct a protective sweep search of a private home under the Buie 'reasonable suspicion' standard, when the officers are lawfully present within the home under authority of the emergency aid doctrine rather than to effect an arrest?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court has held that when law enforcement officers are lawfully present within a private home to make an arrest, the Fourth Amendment permits a protective sweep search of the home when there exists “reasonable suspicion” that “the area swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.” Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325, 334 (1990). Separately, this Court has held the Fourth Amendment permits law enforcement officers to make warrantless entry into a private home to render emergency aid, so long as there exists “an objectively reasonable basis for believing that medical assistance was needed, or persons were in danger.” Michigan v. Fisher, 558 U.S. 45, 48 (2009). The question presented by the petition is: Does the Fourth Amendment permit law enforcement officers to conduct a protective sweep search of a private home under the Buie “reasonable suspicion” standard, when the officers are lawfully present within the home under authority of the emergency aid doctrine rather than to effect an arrest? i

Docket Entries

2021-03-29
Petition DENIED.
2021-03-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/26/2021.
2021-03-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2021-02-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 1, 2021)

Attorneys

Michael Hanuman
Douglas Locke MickoOffice of the Federal Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent