Criminal law litigators – read this opinion. This appeal presented the New Jersey Supreme Court with an issue of first impression: “Whether the police have a right to conduct a protective sweep of a home when an arrest is made outside the home and, if so, the requisite justification for a warrantless entry and protective sweep.” Police went to the defendant’s residence to arrest him because he had active arrest warrants. Officers saw the defendant place a laundry basket into his car in the home’s driveway. When the defendant turned around, a detective arrested and handcuffed him. A sergeant ordered a protective sweep of the defendant’s home for purposes of officer safety because there were weapons and other persons “potentially on the property.” The sergeant came to that conclusion because two vehicles were parked in the driveway; the home’s windows had coverings, obstructing a view into the residence; and a person the other sergeant observed in the backyard may not have been the same person who exited the front door. The trial court denied the defendant’s suppression motion. The Appellate Division reversed, and the New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed. The Court ruled that “when an arrest occurs outside a home, the police may not enter the dwelling or conduct a protective sweep in the absence of a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a person or persons are present inside and pose an imminent threat to the officers’ safety. This balancing of the fundamental right to privacy in one’s home and the compelling interest in officer safety will depend on an objective assessment of the particular circumstances in each case, such as the manner of the arrest, the distance of the arrest from the home, the reasonableness of the officers’ suspicion that persons were in the dwelling and likely to launch an imminent attack, and any other relevant factors. A self-created exigency by the police cannot justify entry into the home or a protective sweep.”
