01-1015 State v. Londo

Listen to this article

“As noted, we must balance the interests we all have to be free from unjustified governmental intrusion against our need to have government protect us from predators. Here, the possible grave danger to the occupants of the house outweighed the intrusive aspects of the officer’s warrantless entry. The trial court also implicitly recognized this when it observed:

I agree that most homeowners would want police to enter their home if they saw what was occurring to do a protective sweep, make sure no one’s in the home. I, for one, would want someone if they saw broken glass and came back later and saw a window open, I personally would want police to go into my home to make sure someone’s not hiding in there, just to do a protective sweep of the property; but I have to apply the laws that exist, and there was no testimony elicited from the officer that exigent circumstances applied in this case.”

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s suppression orders.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Fiorenza, J., Fine, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Denis Stingl, Milwaukee; Lara M. Herman, Madison

For Respondent: Michael B. Plaisted, Milwaukee