State v. Clay

Pursuant to past Oregon Supreme Court decisions, “an emergency aid exception to the . . . warrant requirement is justified when police officers have an objectively reasonable belief, based on articulable facts, that a warrantless entry is necessary to either render immediate aid to persons, or assist persons who have suffered, or who are imminently threatened with suffering, serious physical injury or harm.” State v. Baker, 350 Or 641, 650, 260 P3d 476 (2011).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for coercion constituting domestic violence. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence and his statements obtained after an illegal entry into his apartment. On appeal, Defendant argued that the officers violated his constitutional right “to be free from unreasonable search and seizures” because they illegally entered his home. Additionally, Defendant argued there was no justification for the illegal entry because there was not sufficient evidence to support that the officers had an “objective belief” that someone was threatened with or in imminent danger so “emergency aid exception” did not apply. In response, the State argued that under the circumstances, the entry was justified because the officers had an “objectively reasonable belief” that someone inside required immediate aid or someone was in imminent danger of physical injury or harm based on the sounds of physical violence they heard. Pursuant to past Oregon Supreme Court decisions, “an emergency aid exception to the . . . warrant requirement is justified when police officers have an objectively reasonable belief, based on articulable facts, that a warrantless entry is necessary to either render immediate aid to persons, or assist persons who have suffered, or who are imminently threatened with suffering, serious physical injury or harm.” State v. Baker, 350 Or 641, 650, 260 P3d 476 (2011). The Oregon Court of Appeals concluded that based on the totality of the circumstances, the officers did have an “objectively reasonable belief” that more than a verbal argument was happening in the apartment and that someone inside required assistance.