Anthony Bandiero, Attorney and Senior Legal Instructor, Blue to Gold Law Enforcement Training

A roadside chat from the road, recorded while teaching in Morgantown, Pennsylvania. The question comes from an officer in Texas: a neighbor reports a physical domestic, officers hear arguing through the door, they announce, and everything goes quiet. When can they kick the door in?

This question is, when can you make a forced entry for domestic violence? This question comes from an officer in Texas, and basically he’s saying, hey look, we have a situation where a neighbor calls in that it was a physical domestic. When the cops arrive, they knock on the door, they announce themselves. While they’re at the house, they do hear them still arguing. But when they announce themselves and demand that the door be opened, it all turns quiet. At what point can you kick that door in and make an entry?

Well, we do have to realize that I’ve been given very, very limited facts in this scenario. I don’t think I can really give you a fair answer. There’s just not enough facts. But let me just tell you what the rule is. I do know the law.

Is there a domestic violence exception to the warrant requirement?

The law says this. At the time of entry, at the time that the officer is going to kick that door in, and you probably should check the knob first, at the time that the officer is going to kick that door in, he or she has to have exigent circumstances. Basically, this falls under what’s called the emergency aid doctrine.

There is, by the way, no domestic violence exception to the warrant requirement. It’s not known as that. It falls under the emergency aid exception. So the emergency aid exception basically looks for, at the time of entry, does a police officer have facts and circumstances to reasonably lead him to believe that somebody in the home is in need of protection, like from imminent harm, and needs medical attention and so forth? So it’s emergency aid.

Do courts uphold warrantless entries on domestic violence calls?

Well, courts, I think, lean towards the entry. The majority of the court cases that I read about warrantless entries for domestics are going to uphold the entry, because domestics are violent. There’s an officer safety issue. There’s a victim in there, potentially. Maybe kids are getting harmed.

But we also don’t want to play around with the Fourth Amendment either and go into homes willy-nilly. I certainly wouldn’t want to have the attitude that, hey, if we get that call, I don’t care. If it’s an allegation of domestic and nobody’s opening that door, then I’m going in. I’m going to make that entry. I’m not going to do a timeout and go get the warrant. We don’t want that attitude. We want something to point to, to tell the court.

What should you ask the reporting party before kicking in the door?

Now look, we do have a neighbor saying that it was physical. Before I’m going to kick that door down, though, I’m going to call the RP and ask him or her, what do you know about physical? What do you hear? Like body slamming against the wall? Do you hear punches? Did you see anything? Do you hear anybody saying help? I want to hear that. I want to know the what.

Because if the neighbor says, well, I saw the husband push his wife, and they’ve been arguing and so forth, I’m not going into that house without consent or a warrant. It’s just not enough for me. Now, if you disagree with me, we can still be friends. But I’m just saying, from a legal point of view, I want to make sure that I feel good about the case, because if a lawsuit occurs, I don’t want to be making bad case law.

Is a good motive enough to justify entering a home?

And we also want to save people. We also want to help people. But the reality is that if all the courts cared about is you having a good motive and you just wanted to help people, we wouldn’t have any problem, because cops always have that. They’re always looking to help, protect and so forth. The problem is the Fourth Amendment is still a hurdle to get into the home. So your motive is only part of it. It’s also the facts and circumstances.

The officer hasn’t given me anything here to really win me over that this was either very clearly good or clearly bad. It’s not enough. We just have allegations of physical contact. But you need exigency. If you have exigency, you win. If the courts do not believe that there was exigent circumstances, you lose. Based off the facts, I’m leaning against it. I’d like to know more.

The short version

  • At the time that the officer is going to kick that door in, he or she has to have exigent circumstances. This falls under the emergency aid doctrine.
  • There is no domestic violence exception to the warrant requirement. It’s not known as that.
  • Courts, I think, lean towards the entry, because domestics are violent. But we don’t want to go into homes willy-nilly. We want something to point to, to tell the court.
  • Before I kick that door down, I’m going to call the RP. What do you hear? Body slamming against the wall? Punches? Anybody saying help?
  • A neighbor saying I saw the husband push his wife, and they’ve been arguing, is just not enough for me without consent or a warrant.
  • Your motive is only part of it. It’s also the facts and circumstances. If you have exigency, you win. Based off the facts, I’m leaning against it.

I hope this helps move the ball forward. Short, sweet, and until next time, stay safe.

Related from Blue to Gold

This article is a lightly edited transcript of a Blue to Gold roadside chat and is for training purposes only. It is not legal advice. Check your own state law and your prosecutor before acting. Source video: Ep. #89