|
WHAT WERE YOU
CHARGED WITH?
New Jersey Criminal Lawyer
Home
NJ Criminal Law:
Criminal Charge
Resource Ctr.
NJ Appellate Opinions
Criminal Law Articles
NJ Criminal Law Blog
Criminal Lawyer
Bio
FREE Consultation
15% discount to new web
clients using this form
Contact Info/Office
Directions
HARK & HARK
New Jersey Criminal Lawyer
1101 Marlton Pike West
Cherry Hill, NJ 08002
(866) 427-5529
Practicing in all NJ Counties
|
New Jersey Criminal Lawyer - Appellate Opinions
State v. O’Donnell, N.J. (2010)
The reasonableness of continuous police
presence at the location initially accessed under the emergency aid
exception is defined by [a three-part test] (1) “[t]he public
official must have an objectively reasonable belief, even if later
found to be erroneous, that an emergency demands immediate
assistance in order to protect or preserve life, or to prevent
serious injury; [ (2) ] the provision of assistance must be the
prime motive for the public official's warrantless entry; and, [ (3)
] any search must be limited to those places that have a nexus to
the emergency.
In this case, where the police
gained access and seized evidence without a warrant, the propriety
of the access indisputably was established by the emergency aid
exception to the warrant requirement; the continued police presence
at the site of the dead body of a six-year-old child was authorized
until the scene could be turned over to the medical examiner without
a break in custody; and the seizure of evidence of a crime was
authorized by the plain view doctrine. In respect of the discrete
issue presented in this appeal-whether it was proper for the police
to remain on the premises and seize evidence after discovery of the
dead body abated the initial emergency-the conclusion is, to us,
clear: because the corpse remained at what was obviously the death
scene and the police had the obligation to retain control of the
premises until that control could be transferred to the medical
examiner, the police had a continuing right to remain present at the
scene. Thus, their continued presence was consonant with
constitutional principles, and the plain view seizures performed
during that period thus were constitutionally authorized.
Contact
experienced, aggressive
New Jersey criminal lawyer, Jeffrey Hark
Email Now or Call
1.866.427.5529
|