09-1426 U.S. v. Tapia

Listen to this article

Search and Seizure
Protective sweeps

In executing an arrest warrant, it was not unreasonable for the officers to search the basement of the house as part of the protective sweep.

"Although the defendant claims that the configuration of the basement in this case would preclude a protective sweep since there was only one exit from the basement and the police officers could have secured the premises simply by guarding that door, such an argument is insufficient. Where, as here, police have good grounds to believe that potentially dangerous individuals could be in the basement, a protective sweep into that area is reasonable regardless of whether there might be a 'less intrusive investigatory technique' for securing that area. United States v. Winston, 444 F.3d 115, 120 (1st Cir. 2006) (citing United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1, 11 (1989)). Officers should not be forced to suffer preventable risk of ambush, even where a location is so isolated that the officers could conceivably be protected without entering the area. An 'ambush in a confined setting of unknown configuration is more to be feared than if it were in the open, more familiar surroundings.' United States v. Richards, 937 F.2d 1287, 1291 (7th Cir. 1991). Moreover, 'it does not seem logical or reasonable that . . . the agents would leave such an obvious hiding place, from which harm could be dispensed, unsecured.' Winston, 444 F.3d at 120."

Affirmed.

09-1426 U.S. v. Tapia

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Kapala, J., Cudahy, J.

Full Text