02-1492 U.S. v. Lenoir

Listen to this article

“[P]olice were not aware that Lenoir was entering his own home. They saw Lenoir take flight upon seeing them approach and have difficulty entering the home while armed with a shotgun and an assault rifle. We find that the police reasonably feared for the safety of occupants in the home and for their own safety, especially given Lenoir’s intoxicated state. By delaying entry into the home, in order to find out if Lenoir lived there, police would have risked giving Lenoir the opportunity to harm police or whomever was inside. See United States v. Hardy, 52 F.3d 147, 149-50 (7th Cir. 1995). In fact, Branson testified that he saw a woman and children in the home when he entered. We will not force police to risk the safety of others or themselves when the circumstances and a suspect’s behavior create a reasonable belief that they or someone inside may be in danger. We find that Lenoir’s actions aroused a reasonable suspicion in police, justifying a Terry stop, and further created exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless entry. The police were also not required to knock and announce their presence because they knew Lenoir was heavily armed and because Lenoir already knew he was being pursued.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Lozano, J., Bauer, J.