California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Ray, 21 Cal.4th 464, 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 1, 981 P.2d 928 (Cal. 1999):
This case, however, more closely resembles the facts of State v. Alexander, supra, 124 Md.App. 258, 721 A.2d 275. There, the defendant also argued the officers acted precipitously in entering his residence
Page 13
Like the superior court, "we commend the officers for at least doing their community service to try to protect people and help people." "[W]hen doors are open, we will hope that [officers] will take steps to find out what is going on...." That is what law-abiding, tax-paying citizens desire and expect of their local constabulary. "The fact that abuses [may] sometimes occur during the course of criminal investigations should not give a sinister coloration to procedures which are basically reasonable." (People v. Roberts, supra, 47 Cal.2d at p. 380, 303 P.2d 721.) When officers act in their properly circumscribed caretaking capacity, we will not penalize the People by suppressing evidence of crime they discover in the process.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.