Whether the 'principle of party presentation' is violated

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Whether the “principle of party presentation” articulated in Greenlaw v. United States, is violated where: (1) the prosecution defends a warrantless home entry throughout a suppression motion and appeal, as justified solely by Cady v. Dombrowski’s “community caretaking” exception; (2) the Supreme Court issues a GVR order directing reconsideration in light of Caniglia v. Strom; and (3) on remand, with no supplemental briefing, the Court of Appeals re-affirms the warrantless home entry as justified by the “emergency aid” exception, which the government never claimed, the parties never litigated, and the district court never considered. 2. Whether the “serious aid” exception to the Fourth Amendment authorized police entry into a home without a warrant less than fifty seconds after officers knocked to perform a welfare check, where: (1) officers made no inquiry, but suspected a man inside had caused minor injuries to a woman’s face and neck in a domestic disturbance; and (2) they observed one child “acting excited” in an upstairs window, and heard another child crying inside the home as the woman reentered, with officers’ express assent, to ask the man to come outside.