Also known as: presumptive unreasonableness
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional presumption under the Fourth Amendment that warrantless entries into a home are invalid. The government must demonstrate sufficient exigent circumstances to justify such an entry.
Perry Pratt faces only a civil fine for operating a transmitter above authorized power. Officers arrive at his home in the evening, knock, receive no answer, and enter through an unlocked door to seize the equipment. The court suppresses the transmitter because the minor regulatory violation supplies no exigency sufficient to justify the warrantless entry.
Peter Park's residence is searched under a warrant later found to lack probable cause. Officers relied in good faith on the issuing magistrate's determination. Evidence is admitted under the good-faith exception even though the underlying search lacked a valid warrant.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pablo Perez keeps a lockbox on his screened front porch. Officers open the screen door and lead a drug-detection dog onto the porch without a warrant. The court suppresses the resulting evidence because the physical intrusion into curtilage for an investigative purpose renders the search presumptively unreasonable.
Pamela Phillips is arrested inside her home for a routine felony without an arrest warrant. Officers enter after receiving an anonymous tip and without exigent circumstances. The court grants suppression because the warrantless home entry for a routine arrest is presumptively unreasonable.
Portia Price's apartment is entered without a warrant after officers receive a tip about possible evidence destruction. The government claims exigent circumstances but presents no facts showing imminent loss of evidence. The court suppresses the seized items because the presumption of unreasonableness remains unrebutted.
Priya Prasad places a call from a closed telephone booth. Federal agents attach a listening device to the outside without a warrant. The court holds the electronic surveillance presumptively unreasonable because Prasad possessed a reasonable expectation of privacy in the booth.
The government must prove that a recognized exception such as exigent circumstances or consent applies. Failure to meet this burden results in suppression of the evidence obtained.
Supporting sources
Yes. Minor offenses weigh heavily against a finding of exigency. Courts require a stronger showing of urgency when the underlying conduct carries only modest penalties or no criminal sanctions.
Supporting sources
The presumption extends to the curtilage, including porches and other areas intimately linked to the home. Physical intrusion into curtilage with an investigative purpose triggers the same requirement of a warrant or valid exception.
Supporting sources
No. A private entry does not authorize subsequent police searches of closed containers or concealed spaces. Officers must still obtain a warrant or establish an independent exception once they conduct their own search.
Supporting sources
…a violation of the Fourth Amendment; and (c) that the invasion of a constitutionally protected area by federal authorities is presumptively unreasonable in the absence of a search warrant. As the Court states, 'the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.' The question is what protection it affords. My understanding is that there is a…