Section 9.24 Exigent Circumstances

• Library: Criminal Practice 2012 Supp

1. (§9.24) Exigent Circumstances

Generally, a warrant is required to interpose a detached and neutral magistrate between the police and the citizen. The magistrate is able to make a more thoughtful, objective determination of whether the facts available to the officer and the inferences from those facts establish probable cause. In some situations, however, the circumstances are such that the time necessary to obtain a warrant would either pose a danger to law enforcement officers or others or would lead to the escape of a suspect or destruction of evidence. In either of these circumstances, the doctrine of exigent circumstances will permit a search without a warrant. See Minn. v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 100 (1990); State v. Mahsman, 157 S.W.3d 245, 249 (Mo. App. E.D. 2004).

Most exceptions to the warrant requirement are based on
some sort of exigency. Both search incident to arrest and
the automobile exception have exigency as at least part of
their justification. See Joshua Dressler, Understanding Criminal Procedure § 12.01 (2002). The category of “exigent circumstances” or “emergency” is designated as a catch-all or umbrella to address those situations not otherwise classified under special exceptions. Id. There are at least three essential characteristics to this group of “exigent circumstance” searches:

1. There is no opportunity to obtain a warrant.

2. The exigency or emergency determines the scope of the search.

3. The exception is to the warrant only; probable cause (or the equivalent) is still required.

Id.

In Missouri, courts have long recognized the doctrine of exigent circumstances. See, e.g., State v. Epperson, 571 S.W.2d 260 (Mo. banc 1978), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 909 (1979); State v. Wiley, 522 S.W.2d 281 (Mo. banc 1975); State v. Toney, 537 S.W.2d 586 (Mo. App. W.D. 1976). More modern cases likewise permit an exception to the warrant requirement in a variety of emergency situations. In general, “[e]xigent circumstances exist if delay to obtain a warrant ‘would endanger life, allow a suspect to escape, or risk the destruction of evidence because of an imminent police presence.’” State v. Hicks, 853 S.W.2d 955, 956 (Mo. App. E.D. 1993) (quoting State v. Peters, 695 S.W.2d 140, 147 (Mo. App. W.D. 1985)).

Although each case involving exigent circumstances must ultimately turn on its own facts, see Olson, 495 U.S. at 100, several factors are relevant, seeMahsman, 157 S.W.3d at 249, and several themes have emerged. Exigent circumstances will often be found when officers reasonably believe that a victim may be in a house and in need of immediate aid. State v. Tidwell,888 S.W.2d 736, 740 (Mo. App. S.D. 1994); State v. Butler, 676 S.W.2d 809 (Mo. banc 1984); State v. Turner, 716 S.W.2d 462 (Mo. App. E.D. 1986). See also State v. Varvil, 686 S.W.2d 507 (Mo. App. E.D. 1985), for a discussion of the factors supporting such an exception and State v. Caldwell, 698 S.W.2d 566 (Mo...