On the contrary, @northwesty, there are several local attorney parents who are vigorously defending the students. One posted this on FB:
Lawyers hardly march in lockstep, and good folks of both opinions are just going to have to agree to disagree about this incident until all the facts come out, and most likely after all the facts come out, as well.
They absolutely do NOT need a warrant to follow the resisting kid inside to arrest him. See below:
“If a person is in public, including the open doorway of her house, and the officers engage in an attempt to arrest her, the officers are not required to stop at the door when the suspect retreats into the house. U.S. v. Santana, JUN76, USSC No. 75-19. It is considered a “hot pursuit.” Thus, during the Saturday night fun and games, when officers respond to a call about Bob being drunk again and Bob opens the door and spits at them, it’s constitutional when they break the door down to get him.”
http://crimlaw.blogspot.com/2012/03/can-officer-enter-residence-to-arrest.html
Lucie – the open door is literally “the key” that legalizes the arrest process. Also, it does not look like the lawyer posting on FB understands that the officer is making an arrest. As evidenced by the cop saying he is arresting the kid. That’s the other key.
You can’t kick in a closed door and drag someone out into the street just to talk to them. I agree with that.
But you can go through an open door to complete an arrest of someone who is resisting and fleeing arrest.
And here’s what every lawyer would advise:
Every single thing the kids did was wrong.
@northwesty, how do you know they followed him inside the apartment? My understanding was that he was already IN the apartment when the police arrived at the door and that they pulled him out of the apartment.
The lawyer I was quoting also shared this:
Also, where are you getting that the officer clearly stated he was there to arrest a student? I haven’t seen that documented. Thanks.
the officer said he was arresting the kid for harassment for grabbing his arm or something like that. after he was grabbing at the kid and yanking on his shirt. It had nothing to do with a noise complaint.
I think it’s also disingenuous to think the officer only wanted the kid to step outside to talk. If it was really just about a noise complaint, he would have just said so. My opinion is he was trying to get the kid to come out so he could arrest him outside the apartment, that wasn’t working so he manipulated the situation into the kid “grabbing his arm” so he could arrest him for that instead.
I wholeheartedly agree that the best action would have been for the students to not open the door and that had the door stayed closed the issue would have never escalated, but they did…maybe they had ordered a pizza and were expecting the delivery, maybe they were expecting other friends to show up, maybe they just heard a knock and opened the door without thinking to ask who it was.
Also yes, they should have closed the door, but that point seems to be moot as if there was anything in plain site they probably would have been arrested for it. But it’s good information for other students who may find themselves in similar situations.
But if I recall correctly the young man at the door politely told the officer that he was going to close the door prior to the officer saying anyone was under arrest.
So, if police show up at my house with no intention of arresting me, but wanting to talk and I open the door and refuse, they then have the right to decide to place me under arrest so they have the right to enter my home and force me to speak with them? I’m thinking that falls in a pretty murky area Constitutionally speaking. Our Constitutional rights exist to protect us and I think most court systems would see through a veiled attempt to get around them.
It is all on the videos.
First, the lawyer above agrees that opening the door changes things. So if Caroline, Amateur Esq. wanted to play this game, she needed to advise her friends to keep the door closed. You can talk to the cops through the closed door or through a window.
Second, at one point on the videos, the officer clearly says he is arresting the kid while the kid is standing with the door open. That’s probably because the gal can’t keep herself from yelling about whether the officer is making an arrest or not. Not smart Caroline!!!
Once it is an arrest scenario, the legal analysis changes. The police officer standing in the hall has reached through the open door (consent!!) and has a hold on the arrestee. The kid resists, tries to retreat into the home, and tries to close the door in the cop’s face. Only then do the cops enter into the home. Hot pursuit!!! Which the lawyer above also acknowledges.
It can be argued later whether there are not valid grounds for arrest. It can later be argued later whether any evidence discovered would be inadmissible due to the bogus arrest grounds. That’s what hearings and judges are for. What you can’t do then and there is resist arrest at that point or flee.
No lawyer with a brain would ever advise someone to resist or flee arrest.
Remember – most arrests occur without any need for a warrant. That’s very different than what you need for a search.
If anyone cares, there’s actually plenty of caselaw on so-called “open doorway” arrests.
The rules are different on arrests conducted in public places versus arrests within a private home. Open doorway arrests are treated mostly like public place arrests.
So as the video clearly shows, this is not a situation where the cops have kicked in a door and dragged someone out of their house without a warrant. Analytically and legally, it is a person being arrested in a public place and then resisting and trying to flee. No warrant required most likely.
Big difference.
OK, just watched all the videos posted up-thread.
It seems like things really escalated when the LEO was standing in the doorway, holding on to that one guy, and another guy starts trying to shut the door (while LEO is still holding on to the one guy). At that point, if I’m the cop, I’m going to fear for my own safety (i.e., my arm getting slammed/broken in the door).
I also agree that you should not stand in the doorway talking to police. Either don’t answer the door, or step outside.
I feel for the students involved too. It’s not always clear when a LEO is ordering you, or asking you, to do something and there is a difference. They were trying to preserve their rights, but unfortunately they likely made the situation worse.
Wouldn’t it be easier if people just behaved in a reasonable way?
“They were trying to preserve their rights, but unfortunately they likely made the situation worse.”
These kids were incredibly stupid. Caroline is lucky she and her friends just wound up in jail. Her “legal” advice (likely based on TV show watching) was not only wrong, but easily could have gotten one of her friends killed. Which is the ultimate “duh” move.
I don’t disagree, @northwesty, but this is college. Most of us knew everything in college. 
Are we just gonna ignore the use of the taser and the beating after the student was already down on the ground?
And are we going to simultaneously accuse the student of both refusing to exit the apartment and attempting to “flee” the scene of the crime?
Yes, the billy-clubbing/tazing seemed excessive to me. Alot of adrenaline flowing at that point.
This is a great video to watch about talking to police. The best part is the 2nd half where a cop stands up and agrees that everything the defense lawyer just said is true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Everything is situational though. It’s always good to know when to assert your rights and when to just go along. And I think it’s always a good idea to be calm, polite, non-threatening, and non-physical.
“And are we going to simultaneously accuse the student of both refusing to exit the apartment and attempting to “flee” the scene of the crime?”
Sure. Haven’t you watched the tapes?
The arrestee kid was already out in the hallway. Then drunk dumb ball cap kid pulls arrestee kid from the hallway back into the apartment. Then DDBCK tries to slam the door several times on the cop while the cop’s arm is inside the door. Then DDBCK keeps creeping forward on the cop after being asked to back up. DDBCK also puts himself physically between the cop and the arrestee.
That’s multiple physical threats and physical interferences to a cop taking lawful action up to that point. If you do that, only one thing can happen after that. You will get subdued via force. Unfortunately, arrestee dude gets the worst of it. DDBCK (along with chatty Caroline) are the ones who created the situation. But their friend (who was willing to go outside throughout) is the one with the most bruises.
I also love how the dumb drunk kid faux lawyers ask if the cop has a warrant. Cop says he doesn’t need a warrant. Which would be the correct answer. But then all the drunk dummies yell in unison “Yes you do! Yes you do!” They have no doubts about the excellence of their legal analysis. Presumably based upon binge-watching Law and Order.
The kids are the one who escalated. The kids are the ones who interfered with law enforcement trying to do their job. The kids are the ones who posed a threat to the officers. The cops don’t know if there are weapons or other dangers inside the apartment. Once the cop goes through the doorway it is a potential officer-in-distress situation. That’s DEFCON 1, which is why you see all the other cops piling in after that.
The kids placed the officers at risk. What happens next is, well, what can happen when you do that. Live and learn.
After chatty Caroline and and the Yale girl I would like to point out that being louder doesn’t make you more correct.
People who share the same mentality as @northwesty are why cops get away with pretty much everything they want. They abandon all morality and logic for the sake of defending anyone who has a shield. It’s shameful. Forget the fact that people have a right to ask why they are being arrested and detained. Forget the fact that they were responding to a noise and had no reason to believe there was a reason to fear their lives. As long as they are a cop, there must be some justification for their heinous actions.
There is very little accountability for police officers.
Oh, Calicash, you need to understand just how dangerous the job is for a police officer. If all those being questioned were calm and polite, sure they could just ask questions, reason with people. In this case, they headed into a noisy apartment at 3 am. I’ve met and worked with a lot of obnoxious cops, full of themselves and not much fun to listen to. Still, they have to take control of a situation or their lives could be in danger. I’ll give them the benefit of the situation every time.
Well, I guess we need fewer fearful, trigger happy cops.