987 F.3d 1160
8th Cir.2021Background
- At ~2:38 a.m. a taxi driver reported to police that an intoxicated passenger fled on foot near Jon Luer and Andrea Steinebach’s home after refusing to pay a fare.
- Officers Clinton and Selz arrived, searched between nearby houses and the neighbor’s backyard/porch with a flashlight, then walked along a private pathway and observed the attached garage storm door and inner garage door at Luer-Steinebach’s house were ajar.
- The officers knocked on doors and windows, rang the doorbell, got no response, rechecked the open garage door, and entered the garage; they then opened the partially open door into the kitchen and entered the home with guns drawn.
- The officers conducted a search (including basement) until they encountered Luer; the taxi driver later identified Luer’s stepson as the fare-skipper; no hat or evidence was found and no one was arrested.
- The district court granted partial summary judgment for Luer and Steinebach (finding unlawful entry/search), denied officers’ qualified immunity; the officers appealed.
- The Eighth Circuit held officers entitled to qualified immunity for the curtilage entries and garage entry but not for the subsequent extensive, warrantless search of the interior home; the case was remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers’ entry into adjacent curtilage/path/neighbor’s backyard violated the Fourth Amendment | Luer: warrantless entry/search of curtilage was unlawful absent exigent circumstances | Clinton/Selz: entry was a reasonable community-caretaking sweep to protect safety and investigate reported theft; qualified immunity applies | Court: curtilage sweep and brief entry onto Luer-Steinebach exterior curtilage were arguably reasonable under community caretaking; officers entitled to qualified immunity for those actions |
| Whether officers’ entry into the attached garage and limited threshold check of the kitchen was lawful | Luer: home intrusion without warrant not justified by facts; knocking/threshold view insufficient to allow entry | Officers: open garage/closed-to-street doorway at 3 a.m., no response to knocking, and reported fleeing suspect justified limited protective entry | Court: limited entry into garage and threshold justified (qualified immunity) but only to a narrow caretaking scope |
| Whether the subsequent full entry/search of the interior (basement and whole house) was justified | Luer: extensive, warrantless interior search exceeded any caretaking purpose and violated clearly established law | Officers: search necessary for community safety or exigent circumstances (hot pursuit/emergency aid) | Court: full, warrantless search of home was not justified; clearly established precedent made such an intrusion objectively unreasonable (no qualified immunity for interior search) |
| Whether other exigent exceptions (hot pursuit, emergency aid, exigent destruction of evidence) justified the home entry | Luer: none apply—no evidence suspect was armed, injured, or an ongoing emergency | Officers: argued hot pursuit/emergency aid based on open doors and reported fleeing suspect | Court: rejected hot pursuit/emergency-aid/other exigent exceptions on these facts; officers lacked sufficient objective basis for interior search |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (warrantless home entry prohibited absent exigent circumstances)
- Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (home is core Fourth Amendment sanctuary)
- Florida v. Jardines, 569 U.S. 1 (curtilage treated as part of the home for Fourth Amendment purposes)
- Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (articulating the community-caretaking exception)
- South Dakota v. Opperman, 428 U.S. 364 (caretaking searches must be limited in scope)
- Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (framework for exigent-circumstance exceptions)
- Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (emergency-aid exigency may justify warrantless entry in some circumstances)
- Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740 (exigent circumstances rarely justify warrantless home entry for minor offenses)
- United States v. Selberg, 630 F.2d 1292 (8th Cir.) (warrantless intrusion beyond threshold not justified where no signs of emergency)
- Dist. of Columbia v. Wesby, 138 S. Ct. 577 (qualified-immunity standard: unlawfulness must be clearly established)