Commonwealth v. Saywahn
91 Mass. App. Ct. 706
| Mass. App. Ct. | 2017Background
- Connecticut issued an arrest warrant for Saywahn in connection with a shooting; Springfield police were contacted to execute the warrant at his Springfield home.
- On Feb. 3, 2016, Detective Bates and several uniformed, armed officers knocked; Saywahn answered, admitted he was the person in the warrant, and was handcuffed inside the front door without resistance.
- Officers asked whether anyone else was in the house; Saywahn hesitated, mumbled, then answered "no."
- Lieutenant Kent, concerned by the hesitancy, conducted a protective sweep and opened a second-floor bedroom, where he observed a firearm protruding from a bed.
- After the sweep the police obtained a search warrant and later recovered the firearm; Saywahn moved to suppress the evidence as the sweep lacked justification.
- The motion judge granted suppression; the Commonwealth appealed and the Appeals Court affirmed the suppression order.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Saywahn's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a protective sweep during execution of the arrest warrant was justified | Sweep was justified by (1) the violent nature of the underlying crime, (2) the defendant’s initial ambiguous response about other occupants, and (3) officer safety concerns | Sweep was unjustified because the defendant was immediately handcuffed, cooperative, and there were no specific facts showing others were present or dangerous | Sweep was not justified; suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Buie, 494 U.S. 325 (1990) (authorizes quick, limited protective sweeps when officers have articulable facts of danger)
- Commonwealth v. Matos, 78 Mass. App. Ct. 156 (2010) (standards for protective sweeps during arrest execution)
- Commonwealth v. DeJesus, 70 Mass. App. Ct. 114 (2007) (consideration of violence implicit in charged crime and criminal history)
- Commonwealth v. Colon, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 579 (2015) (location of arrest relative to swept area and context matter)
- Commonwealth v. Nova, 50 Mass. App. Ct. 633 (2000) (protective sweep unjustified absent articulable facts of others present and dangerous)
- Commonwealth v. Wren, 391 Mass. 705 (1984) (avoiding contact with police alone insufficient to justify suspicion)
- Commonwealth v. McCollum, 79 Mass. App. Ct. 239 (2011) (defendant’s resistance or cooperation is a factor in sweep justification)
- Commonwealth v. Walker, 370 Mass. 548 (1976) (officers’ hearing noises or seeing persons can support sweep)