Can State courts lawfully hold evidence admissible obtained from a warrantless search, seizure, and arrest where an officer entered the residence of a fleeing misdemeanant

Question Presented Can State courts lawfully hold evidence admissible obtained from a warrantless search, seizure, and arrest where an officer entered the residence of a fleeing misdemeanant, and the ; court finds the warrantless search and seizure to be lawful in that an exigency did exist due to categorical reasons that: a) the officer was in fresh pursuit, b) the court interjected that the fleeing misdemeanant was “in fact” committing a felony fleeing and eluding, or c) the suspect’s vehicle registration did not match his residence address; contrary to this Court's rulings outlined in Lange v, California? ; . In other words: Can State courts hold that a warrantless home entry where an officer ; entered the residence of a fleeing misdemeanant is permissible because of the exigent . circumstances created solely by the assumption that certain specific ‘conditions’ trigger a rule ; allowing the warrantless entry such as: 1) The officer was in fresh pursuit of the fleeing misdemeanant, 2) The fleeing misdemeanant could have been charged with a felony, so he was “in fact” committing one, or 3) The address on the vehicle’s registration the misdemeanant was driving did not match his residence address; Therefore, a warrantless entry is lawful even : though a law enforcement emergency does not exist [e.g. imminent harms of violence, destruction of evidence, escape from the home, etc.] which is not in agreement with this Court’s holdings in their interpretation of 4k Amendment rights in Lange? *All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. «There are no related cases to list. i