Was Gates Fourth Amendment Rights violated?

[BklnDem75]

When police respond to a burglary/b&e call, do that allow a warrantless nonconsensual entry by the officer? Did Gates invite the officer to follow while he retrieved his IDs? I'm reading a lot of assumptions for the reason Gates got so angry. Did the officers invite themselves without Gates' permission? Here's case law I've been able to find so far:

The Fourth Amendment prohibits warrantless entry into a home for the purposes of
making an arrest. Kirk v. Louisiana, 536 U.S. 635, 637-39 (2002); Payton v. New York, 445
U.S. 573, 586-87 (1980). To justify a warrantless entry into a residence, the government must
show the existence of probable cause and exigent circumstances. Kirk, 536 U.S. at 638. The
existence of an arrest warrant allows entry into a dwelling in which the defendant lives, but
entry into the home of a third party must be supported by a search warrant or exigent
circumstances. Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 211-22 (1981). A non-exigent entry
to effect an arrest of an overnight guest of a third party requires at least an arrest warrant to
comply with the Fourth Amendment. Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91 (1990).


I'm genuinely curious whether an officer can enter our homes without a warrant when responding to a call. Anyone?

[merh]

1. Yes, he had probable cause.

The call regarding the break in and the door being forced open.

That is probably cause

[BklnDem75]

6. I can understand about the door, but...

Don't the officer have to determine whether a burglary's in progress before probable cause goes into effect?

[merh]

17. The call and the door would be enough "probable cause"

if, in fact, the door showed signs of being forced open.

Some would argue the presence of a black man inside would be a part of that probable cause because the complaining caller told the police "two black men with back packs" were breaking in.

Cops I know would have asked the dispatcher to try to find out who was the lawful resident. At that time of the day, chances are the break in was the resident that locked themself out of the house.

[Bluerthanblue]

9. can anyone explain why Crowley asked for the campus police to

come after he'd just seen Gates' picture ID verifing his name and address and that he was a Prof.?
The report that Crowley filed mentions his asking for them to come- yet leaves out any follow up- other than to mention that among the crowd that gathered outside the residence were Harvard Campus Police- (as if they just happened to show up)-

Why did Crowley need the Harvard Campus Police- and if he really 'needed' them there, why did he not acknowledge them or try to sound surprised that they had arrived???

this just doesn't make sense.

:shrug:

[merh]

10. That one causes me concern.

See, Crowley used to be a member of the Harvard University Police. If he called them because they had jurisdiction, then he called too late. He should have had dispatch call them to meet him on the scene when he took the call.

Did Crowley still not believe Gates after he was provided the ID and he wanted to verify that Gates was a professor at Harvard?

I know how I would use it if I were involved in the lawsuit against Crowley, if one were filed.

[pscot]

12. Crowley was a Harvard cop

and didn't recognize Gates? The guy has been at Harvard almost 20 years, and he's an internaional celeb.

[merh]

13. Which may explain why Crowley was so sensitive about this

and why he handled it so poorly. Add that to the fact that Crowley trains cadets how to handle "racial profiling" issues and racism issues, and you have an officer that was dealing with his ego issues. Gates was highly emotional and so too was Crowley. I mean, imagine Crowley's embarrassment that Gates is calling the Chief's office and telling them he (Crowley) is a racist.

[pscot]

15. I had thought about that

If he has any sensitivity at all, he must be profoundly embarassed about this. Plus his cred is shot.

[merh]

18. I agree.

And there is a potential witness we haven't heard from. What happened to Gates' driver, the 2nd black man breaking in to the house?

Where did he go, was he still at the house?

[mkultra]

31. crowley was wiht the cambridge PD

[Bluerthanblue]

19. thanks Merh- i didn't

know Crowley had been a Harvard campus policeman- and after what you say it does seem curious that the HUP weren't called immediately-
Crowley claims to have been surprised by Gates' anger- ""While I was led to believe that Gates was lawfully in the residence, I was quite surprised and confused with the behavior he exhibited toward me," well, he is supposedly an expert on Racial Profiling, and if Gates' anger came as a surprise, he's either incredibly naieve- or not being very honest. That doesn't make trusting his report to be true any easier- at least for me-


In the police transcript Crowley says:
"As I turned and faced the door, I could see an older black male standing in the foyer of __ Ware St. I made this observation through the glass pained front door. As I stood in plain view of this man later identified as Gates, I asked if he would step out onto the porch and speak with me. He replied "no I will not" then demanded to know who I was. I told him that I was "Sgt. Crowley of the Cambridge Police" and that I was "investigating a report of a break in in progress" at the residence. While I was making this statement Gates opened the front door and exclaimed "Why, Because I'm a black man in America?" I then asked Gates if there was anyone else in the residence. While yelling, he told me it was none of my business and accused me of being a racist police officer. I assured Gates that I was responding to a citizens call to the Police and that the caller was outside as we spoke"

Several things are wrong here.
1- why didn't Crowley identify himself as the Police immediately, not waiting until Gates had to ask him.

2- Why would Crowley ask a man who was breaking into a residence to 'step outside and speak with him' (still not having identified himself as a Police officer)?

3-Was it evident enough to Crowley that Gates was neither a criminal breaking into the home or that he represented no threat him that he didn't wait for back-up or even have his gun drawn??

4-Why did Crowley note that it was as he was "making this statement" (identifing himself as a police officer and the reason for his being there) that he says Gates opened the door and "exclaimed "Why, because I'm a black man in America?" ? Because he knew Gates hadn't heard what he said? He didn't repeat himself, and he infered that because Gates was opening the door, and talking at the same time, it was likely that his words had not been heard. :shrug:??

5-Where does his report show how he gained access to Gates' house? He says Gates "opened the front door" he doesn't say they went inside- but then he says he assured Gates that "the caller" was "outside"- ??? Wasn't Crowley still outside? Did he barge in while identifing himself to Gates as Gates was 'exclaiming'?

It may seem like nitpicking- but this account given by a Sgt. with over 10 yrs on the force is odd to say the least. (imo)



not very reassuring- or very professional.

:hi:

[merh]

22. I agree with you, his report is not very professional

but then again, neither were his actions.

[cleveramerican]

25. Received a report of TWO men breaking into the address

until the officer determines the situation, not knowing yet who Gates is,
it is safer for Gates and the officer to step(one or two steps)outside to discuss it further
At this point the officer cannot let Gates walk away, To get his ID or for any other reason, He must stay with the person found inside the residence.
He must follow Gates, even chase him, if he attempts to leave the officers presence.

[Bluerthanblue]

27. and yet the officer hadn't identified himself as POLICE- waited

for back-up or approached with his weapon ready???? Crowley seemed comfortable enough with his assessment that Gates offered no threat to him, that he went in on his own, and didn't even identify himself as POLICE until after Gates demanded to know???-

Crowley wrote a detailed report himself- which says this.

:shrug:

[cleveramerican]

24. standard procedure to call campus police when city polic dispatched

to a Harvard property.

Gates lives a public street where many but not all of the houses are owned by the university.His house is owned by Harvard, which triggers the call to campus police

[Bluerthanblue]

28. so why did Crowley have to call for the HUP- AFTER

he'd determined to his satisfaction that Gates was who he said? They SHOULD have been called automatically as you say, no?

[cleveramerican]

34. they were

Cambridge PD arrived first

[merh]

30. Crowley once was Harvard police

He knew the address and when dispatched to it, he should have had dispatch call Harvard PD to have a unit meet him.

Additionally, when going to a B&E complaint the officer normally asks dispatch to provide him with the identity of the registered owner/resident. You know, do a computer search to see who is listed at that address. That way, when the cop gets there he has a general idea as to who should be there.

Your timing is not correct, the call should not have been made after identification provided.

(My guess is, he wanted more of an audience so he had the public required for disturbing the peace. Problem is, the police are not the public.)

[quiller4]

36. The house is owned by the college and campus police have

jurisdiction. Crowley should have briefed them when they arrived and left turning the matter over to them.

[geek_sabre]

37. from what I understand

He ONLY showed the Harvard ID, which wouldn't include an address.

He likely called to confirm based on name.

[Zavulon]

40. The ID had his address on it?

I've never seen a faculty ID show a home address; in fact it would be discouraged because angry students have been known to cross the line.

Can you please give me a source which demonstrates that the address was on the ID?

[dalaigh lllama]

2. All my knowledge on this is from fiction

I just know in all the Nero Wolfe mysteries, Archie always used to keep the chain on the door when the police came calling so they wouldn't "accidentally" think they could come in. :D

[Lars39]

7. lol

I'd forgotten about that. :D

[MercutioATC]

3. Two problems with that:

1) Crowley didn't enter against Gates' will, and

2) Gates was arrested outside his house for his actions outside his house.

[BklnDem75]

5. Not exactly sure what 'will' has to do with it.

Simply entering the person's home would make that a warrantless entry unless invited.

As for 2), Didn't really ask where he was arrested. Asked if his rights were violated.

[Sandaasu]

4. Given that the officer was told that there was a suspected break in there, he had probable cause.

If we say that what he did was a 4th amendment violation... well, good luck getting any cops to help you if someone causes trouble in your home. He was also right to assume that Gates might have been there illegally until the ID was actually shown to him. If Gates had been a troublemaker of some sort, he might have taken that opportunity to escape or do something harmful. Until that point, the cop had a duty to keep an eye on him.

[BklnDem75]

8. Not sure what that has to do with anything.

People call police over suspicious activity all the time. Not sure how that alone allows an officer to enter one's property before determining if a crime is in progress.

[pscot]

14. Given that the officer has both disgression

and a brain, he might have taken a minute to think abour what he was doing. Obama was wrong. Crowley's not stupid. He's an idiot.

[tomm2thumbs]

16. indeed, officer discretion is part of it too

there is that to contend with on every level - and that is measured by the person acting on it

[tomm2thumbs]

11. for what it's worth - not my doing, but found this info

What the Supreme Court said was that any entry into a house without a warrant must assumed to be an illegal search when it comes before a judge. (After the fact) What they were saying was that the home is sacred and the highest standard of PC is required. In doing so, it charges Judges to ensure the exigent circumstance exception to a warrant is not abused. Nothing more. The most tangible result is that It is easier for evidence to be excluded. Refer to “Fruits of the poisinous tree” doctrine.

In this case, “Crime (felony) in progress” was the exigent/emergency circumstances. Suspicion and perhaps even Reasonable Suspicion (these are more legal concepts you might not be familiar with) existed in the form of a 911 call (not enough to normally enter a house) and the corrobarating evidence of a kicked in door raised it to probable cause. This is not even a close call. Every day of the week that one will fly in any state in the USA.

The scope of the search that can then be conducted is limited to that emergency that exists. THAT is normally where any abuse takes place. Plain view doctrine still applies. By frankly, asking the professor to step outside he was actually limiting the scope of Crowley’s plain view search, thus protecting Gates rights further than necessary. (Besides the safety issue for the officer)

Here is another example: If police are summoned to a domestic violence call, they do not normally enter based strictly on a call. But if they hear a woman screaming for help; they will enter. Why? CRIME IN PROGRESS. It is an exigent/emergency circumstance.

Bottom line: They had probable cause to enter and reasonable suspicion to detain. Check Terry vs Ohio for detaining a suspicious person under suspicious circumstances for further investigation.

*** providing without verification, I am not a lawyer ***

[Truthiness Inspector]

20. No. This does not apply.

Stop making exuses for this fool. Unless you want to make it ok for someone to burglarize (or worse) YOUR home and as long as that person shouts vehemently and indignantly at the officers who respond to get the hell outta there, as the officers retreat and your belongings (or worse) are removed uninterrupted.

You are also missing "exigent circumstances." No warrant necessary, nor should it be.

[BklnDem75]

32. Seems like you're the only one making excuses

Here a thought, read the question slower. That just might help.

[Ken Burch]

41. May I remind you that there WASN'T a burglary?

If any cop had approached a house like that and the person they spoke to had been WHITE and had then shown his or her ID proving that it was HIS house, the cop would have quietly apologized and left. And you know it.

You're acting like Dr. Gates was putting the entire structure of civilization at risk just by standing up for himself.

[Inchworm]

21. The cop got a 911 call

That gives him the ok to enter the place. Well, it did in my case. I assume that is the norm in every state.

Just think. Gates could have been duct taped up in the closet. If the officer hadn't cleared the scene he would have been in the wrong.

:hi:

[BklnDem75]

23. Though I agree...

that Gates rights may not have been violated in this situation, I don't think the 911 call alone is enough to gain warrantless nonconsensual entry. As an earlier poster mentioned, the addition of the front door's condition gave the cop probable cause.

'In order for the warrantless, consentless,entry and search to be legal, the officer must “reasonably believe” a emergency situation requiring immediate police intervention exists. The courts have often interpreted this to mean the officer must have probable cause. In Kerman v. City of New York, the court found “probable cause for a forced entry in response to exigent circumstances requires finding a probability that a person is in ‘danger.’” <8>

The courts commonly apply a test known as the Mitchell Test in determining if an emergency search was valid. This test requires the officer to have had “reasonable grounds to believe” that there was an emergency and an immediate need for police assistance, the search was not motivated primarily by an intent to arrest or seize evidence and there must have been a “reasonable basis approximating probable cause” to believe the area searched was associated with the emergency. <8>

Emergency searches must be limited to searches for and to aid the injured. Officers may however, seize items in plain view during a lawful emergency search. <8>

The most common emergency searches are as a result of a 911 call. Many of these calls are anonymous. In most cases the courts have found police response to anonymous calls to be unlawful unless additionally corroborating information is available. This information can include officer observations, such as sounds of violence, fighting, gun shots or cries for help. <8>'


http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/US_Criminal_Law/Searches_without_a_warrant

[cleveramerican]

26. He saw a person through the front door

following the report of a break-in he must detain and question that subject

[Bluerthanblue]

29. doesn't he need to identify himself as POLICE?

especially if he's asking the person (suspect) to come out on the porch and talk with him????

[cleveramerican]

35. thats why they have uniforms, cruisers

first few minutes he has a lot of leeway

[rantormusing]

33. It's far too late to worry about the 4th

[duckandgather]

38. Crowley's State of Mind a Much More Interesting Question

I agree with the posters who say there was probable cause. The more interesting question to me concerns Crowley's state of mind on the 16th.

Before I launch into that, let me just say I am excited about the prospect of Crowley, Obama and Gates getting together for beers on the White House lawn. Hope Crowley wears his uniform. I'm going to print out a picture from that event, and print out one of those Bull Connor dogs being set on peaceful back folks pictures from the early 60s, and hang up the two. What a wonderful country we live in to go from from Jim Crow 45 years ago, to Jim Crowley having a beer with a black president and black leading professor next week. And there was no bloody revolution to get from there to here. Back to July 16th though ...

I call b*#%^*t on suggestions that the main reason why Crowley asked Gates to step onto the porch was for safety or apprehension reasons.

First, note that Gates is a 58 year old, limping guy. He ain't LeBron. The idea that he could flee anywhere, or that Crowley would have thought that (having watched Gates walk toward him) is ludicrous, IMHO.

Second, note that Crowley himself believed he had probable cause. He walked in uninvited. That shows he thought he had more than enough to overcome the 4th. Because if he had any doubt, and he found a drug lab inside, and it turned out he had no probable cause, then there might be a liberal enough judge in Boston to exclude that evidence. Wouldn't look good on the cop.

I come back to: Why did Crowley say "Would you step onto the porch?" instead of "Sorry to trouble you sir ..." as the first thing he said to Gates?

As I explain in the blog post http://duckandgather.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/did-crowley-ask-gates-to-step-onto-the-porch/, the legal translation of "Would you step onto the porch?" is:

“I know you might be the owner/resident of this house. But there seems to be something fishy about you (e.g. maybe you’re running a drug lab inside). The 4th Amendment requires that you be outside in order for me to legally search you.”

Basically, I suspect the rule of the Cambridge police is: "When you approach a house, and someone answers the door, if your spider sense tingles, ask them to step outside to 'speak' with you." This is because if they turn out to be a perp, there's nothing lost and everything gained. Alternatively, if they turn out to be a lawful resident of the place, then any evidence you find upon searching the person outside will fly past the 4th Amendment.

I strongly doubt that every time an officer like Crowley walks up to a house, the first thing he says to the person answering the door is: "Would you step outside?" I strongly suspect that cops like Crowley do this only when they are suspicious that the person answering the door might be a perp -- of any kind.

Has to be a bright line for these cops. They tend not to be the top graduates in their class.

So where this analysis leads: In the first 10 seconds of laying eyes upon Gates, watching Gates walk toward Crowley, watching Gates say "Officer, can I help you?", Crowley thought there was a good possibility that Gates was a perp -- resident or not.

Gates didn't understand the legal meaning of Crowley asking him to step outside. But he didn't miss for a moment the menacing tone in Crowley voice in making that request. This is what Gates reacted to, and threw his hissy fit over.

Aside: 3 people in this story: Obama, Crowley, Gates. As of today, my admiration for the first two is higher then it was a couple of days ago. Not so for Gates. He hasn't come off well yet. I'm hoping he redeems himself over beers. Because, as of right now, he's seem to be a bit of a pompous ass, IMHO.

Anyway, the teachable moment of this thing is not about Gates learning to submit. Instead, it's about Crowley, and all similarly well-meaning cops, learning to be able to distinguish black guys who are likely perps from black guys who are very likely not perps.

Re the idea that "Hey, Crowley was responding to a call about two black guys busting in, Gates is black, ergo of course Crowley would suspect Gates", I say: Yeah, them niggers are really hard to tell apart, aren't they?

This is the crux of racial profiling. It used to be called stereotyping.

And it's gonna end in the age of Obama. That's why I so look forward to next week's shared beer. Maybe these will be the first two really successful black guys Crowley has ever closely met in a non-professional situation. Hopefully, the lightbulb will go off for him and he can spread the word to other cops that most black folk out there are decent and easy to identify as such.

[BlooInBloo]

39. I've learned from DU that people don't have rights if the cop doesn't like their tone...

Or maybe that only applies to some people.