Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 95-1814
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
____________________
Before
____________________
April 29, 1997
____________________
OPINION EN BANC
____________________
with
whom
with
whom
John Reinstein
_______________
was
on
brief
Leonard H. Kesten
___________________
Fliegauf
________
appellees.
with
whom
were on
Kurt
_____
brief
Per Curiam.
__________
decision of
one
case, specifically, a
without
Review is
a search
warrant
most favorable to
violated
the
summary judgment on
litigated in this
entry into a
Fourth
house
Amendment.
in the light
summary judgment.
Le
__
Blanc v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 6 F.3d 836, 841 (1st Cir. 1993),
_____
__________________
of August 6, 1989,
James Joyce
the
("the Joyces")
Joanne and
in Tewksbury, seeking
officers Alfred
Although Lance
to arrest
earlier in
was
there.
Lance's
Allegedly, an
arrest
on
charge of
Lance answered
door,
outstanding warrant
violating
existed for
chapter 209A
7.
door closed.
warrant for
Instead,
his arrest,
Lance retorted
"ya
and asked
him to
right" and
mother.
-2-2-
step outside.
withdrew from
The police
the
followed him.
to
room.
her dining
The
Joyces asked
the officers
what was
going on
and
were there to
existed,
although they
room with
separately) to call
Donovan
and
they
did not
with them.
a third officer
the police
Budryk's
have it
(who had
department, which
understanding
that
James
arrived
confirmed
there
was
an
she protested
Joanne Joyce.
Joanne
she denies
pushing
the
police officers
grasped
Joanne
Joyce's
upper
away.
One of
arms and
the
moved
officers
her
aside,
Joyce
in February 1990.
officers,
U.S.C.
1983
upon
alleged
11I.
violations
had violated 42
of
the
Fourth
and
Fourteenth
-3-3-
Amendments
warrant
during
into the
the
officers'
Joyce home
and
infliction
entry
claimed use
search
of excessive
of emotional distress
without
battery, intentional
supervised the
officers in
The defendants
of
illegal entry.
38 (1976), they
Fourth
of
motion
by
Lance Joyce
margin
evidence in the
because they
lawfully arresting.
on the issue
said that
Amendment
pursuit
entered
whom they
the
were
order,
not violated
in the
in
process of
granted defendants'
explaining that
record to
Joyce home
the
"[t]here
is
no
entry was
in
three
of
the remaining
claims were
presented at
only
trial: a
section 1983
claim alleging
had violated
Joyce,
causing
claim; and
his mother
injury; a
a Massachusetts Civil
malicious prosecution
based on
-4-4-
altercation.
on all counts.
Joanne
Joyce then
appealed on
her own
executrix of
for reversal
of the
arguing
that
summary judgment
also for a
the trial
as one
of
new trial
the latter
behalf and
as
grant on
the illegal
on the other
claims
claims,
was tainted
entry
Joanne
Joyce
then
petitioned for
rehearing
en banc,
_______
supported
curiae.
______
warrant,
Santana
_______
by the
American Civil
Liberties Union
as amicus
______
violated
the
Fourth Amendment;
they
distinguish
public space (just outside her house) when the police engaged
her,
while
Lance
Joyce
was
inside
throughout.
violation of
restraining order,
his
parents'
home
is
not a
felony
under
Massachusetts law.
In considering
concluded
that
the
the petition
claim
against the
supplemental
memoranda.
officers
Accordingly, we
might
be
requested
-5-5-
resolution of
the panel
the appeal.
Because
they wish
reason
to believe
the suspect
arrest warrant,
to
is within."
person's
451
U.S. 204,
house
may be
212-13
lawfully
v. New
___
States,
______
Payton
______
(1981).
a search warrant
Steagald v. United
________
______
However,
entered
without a
third
search
213-14,
and
exigent
circumstances include
at 42-43; Hegarty
_______
"hot
pursuit."
v. Somerset County,
_______________
53
F.3d
1367, 1374
(1st Cir.),
cert. denied,
____________
116 S.
Ct. 675
(1995).
Here, the
entrance into the Joyce home because they were in hot pursuit
of
Lance
Joyce.
police first
Joanne Joyce
the ACLU
standing directly
that
and
to uphold
on her threshold.
the entry
in this
respond that
case creates
a slippery
-6-6-
the house.
The governing
not
yield
surprising
very
many
since
reasonableness:
the
bright
line
ultimate
rules.
This
is
not
touchstone
is
one
of
warrant.
See Minnesota v.
___ _________
Hegarty, 43 F.3d at
_______
_____
1374.
Conversely, we are
already in progress,
not impressed
is truly trivial,
But
present
exception
even
case
within
is not
this
reasonableness
entirely
framework,
straightforward.
Santana's
_______
when
the police
And,
the fact
violation
here
"minor offense,"
first confront
that
as a
Massachusetts
classifies
misdemeanor does
see Welsh v.
___ _____
the
not
house
an arrest.
the
alleged
reduce it
to a
740, 753
(1984); we
violations
of protective
orders
are among
the more
grave
-7-7-
On
Lance
involved actual
some basis
have
violence, although
ourselves suggested
may undermine
have had
protective order.1 We
that certain
"mitigating factors"
any inadequacy
1374.
occurs at
nighttime.
Hegarty,
_______
43 F.3d
at
Santana at
_______
the other,
do not definitively
case.
there
is no
settled answer as
doorway arrests.
to the
pole and
resolve our
own
constitutionality of
___ _____
1984)
_____
divided,
helpful to the
police in this
____________________
had
drinking
corroborated by
protective
twice by the
to
problem
(information
was
been placed in
escape on prior
which
arrest or tried
(1989)
and United States v. Carrion, 809 F.2d 1120, 1123, 1128 & n.9
_________________
_______
(5th Cir. 1987) with
____
F.2d 224,
867 F.2d
-8-8-
Given
the
unsettled
hesitation in concluding
protected
by
officials
against section
acted
state
the law,
we
have
qualified
reasonably.
of
Hunter
______
immunity
1983
v.
which
Bryant,
______
case are
protects
liability so
public
long as
502 U.S.
no
224,
they
228
(1991);
the
Supreme Court
has
said,
qualified immunity
335, 341
(1986).
law."
The aim
otherwise be deterred
"provides
incompetent or those
Malley v. Briggs,
______
______
is
As
to protect
475 U.S.
those who
might
that an
The
critical point
here is
that officers
Donovan and
at
1, 3 (1st
cir. 1996).
Thus,
the officers
are not
liable
unless
in the
circumstances of
this case it
is reasonably
officers,
unlawful.
that
the
Because
entry
it is
without
search
warrant
that there
was
was a
no
immunity.
____________________
-9-9-
The
Joyces
also
sued
the town
under
section
1983,
officers
resulted
in
their
unlawful entry
St. Louis
__________
v.
Prapotnik,
_________
of Independence, 445
_______________
is
the
actions
of
112,
municipality to be
lower-level
home.
128
(1988),
and
her
485 U.S.
of
officers
who
Consequently, it
are
themselves
entitled to
qualified immunity.
Walker v.
______
Waltham Housing
_______________
However,
our
rationale
here
for
granting
qualified
made
it
reasonable to
constitutional--also
Tewksbury
believe
the
precludes
conduct in
municipal
this
case
liability.
18 (1st Cir.
their
conduct
whether the
the
1992), in
failing to teach
was unconstitutional.
officers' conduct
was endorsed
the officers
We
need not
13,
that
decide
by a
municipal policy.
29 (1st Cir.
issue on the
Fourth Amendment
But the en
__
-10-10-
banc
____
court is
agreed that
qualified immunity
applies, and
there
is less consensus
issue.
that
very
doubtful
Resolution
decisive,
legality
can properly
under
await
the
a case
home was of
Fourth
where
Amendment.
the issue
is
The
panel opinion
is
withdrawn and,
_________
for the
Concurrence follows.
___________________
reasons
is affirmed
________
-11-
-11-
TORRUELLA,
TORRUELLA,
damages
suit
appropriate,
Chief Judge
Chief Judge
___________
on
qualified
because
(concurring).
(concurring).
immunity
the parties
Resolving this
grounds
exercised the
is
entirely
opportunity to
brief this issue, and because the issue of qualified immunity can
be "resolved
States
______
v.
with
certitude on
La Guardia, 902
___________
F.2d
the existing
1010,
1013
record."
(1st Cir.
United
______
1990)
(appellate
court has
discretion,
v. Harwood,
_______
in the
exceptional case,
established"
from the
officers when
point
a total of
to
of view
of
seven judges,
"clearly
the defendant
including the
police
district
court, the appellate panel, and finally the en banc First Circuit
court,
that right.
I write
that my
dissenting
Steagald v.
________
have
I believe
brothers,
show
in
their
efforts
to
how
is controlling,
is reasonableness.
people
to
be
secure
in
their
persons,
of the
houses, papers,
and
intuitions regarding
the sanctity
the determination of
what kinds
reasonable.
We
follow
the
of the home
obviously inform
of searches are,
Supreme
-12-12-
Court's
deep-seated
and are
lead
in
not,
these
not fall squarely under any one Supreme Court precedent, as here,
the particular
search at issue.
We
follow
fleeing
suspect
from
that it
the
may be
threshold
reasonable to
of
private
to a
______
private
place.").
We
also
certainly
not
___
reasonable
residence
without a search
circumstances,
warrant is
under
in
the
inside.
either
know
to
from
simply
enter
warrant, in
belief that
One may
Santana
_______
Steagald
________
third
the absence
the
seek to
that
subject
or Steagald
________
--
but
party's
an arrest
present case
either way,
this
drawing
pursuit"
the
outlines of
exception,
the
"exigent
find
myself
circumstances" or
naturally
is
of exigent
of
subsume the
it
In
"hot
turning
to
reasonableness.
The
reasonable for
precise
police
question,
officers, who
then,
are
is
whether
acting on
an
it
is
arrest
warrant arising
are standing a
subject of that
few feet
of a jailable
offense, who
face-to-face with,
the
a transparent
-13-13-
outer
must
that
the arrestee
refuses
subject that he
to cooperate
and retreats
into the
residence, to follow
that arrestee
the residence
in order
to
residence.)
these
Because
case
falls
Santana.
_______
to
follow
under
believe,
on
the
"hot
precedents
that
pursuit"
facts,
that
the
rationale
discussed
in
are,
on
occasion,
not
clearly
determinative.
This
said, it
may be
that this
particular damages
suit, with its spotty record, is not the best context in which to
the merits.
to qualified
the police
an
After all,
this is not a
___
arrestee
clearly
may
immunity.
without any
process at
all
question
whether the
process
-14-14-
in search of
action would
that was
Concurrence follows.
___________________
-- such
case in which
followed
here was
LYNCH,
LYNCH,
sympathetic
to the
very
strong arguments
the judges
there
this
While
that the
I am
police
That
area is
officers'
not
actions
so clearly
established
as to
objectively unreasonable.
make
Anderson
________
the
v.
Creighton,
_________
483
Laconia, 71 F.3d
_______
U.S.
635
20 (1995).
The officers
v.
City of
_______
are entitled
Dissent follows.
_______________
to
-15-15-
SELYA,
SELYA,
Judge, joins
Judge, joins
_____
Circuit Judge,
Circuit Judge,
_____________
(dissenting).
(dissenting).
with
with
whom
whom
Though the
STAHL,
STAHL,
Circuit
Circuit
_______
immunity (a doctrine
briefed
nor argued
which, as I understand
to the
Although
I applaud the
cannot in good
court; that
on the
withdrawal of
conscience join
opinion admittedly
demanded
by
clearly established
adhering
to
it
and, thus,
qualified
panel), effectively
unconstitutional encroachment
The
condones an
sanctity of
the home.
the panel
opinion, I
the opinion of
edges closer to
law,
perpetuates
but
the en
banc
the holding
stops short
of
a constitutionally
intolerable result.
As
the
en
doctrine of qualified
banc
not
shield
faithfully
immunity protects
does
court
mistaken.
violations
relates,
state actors
the
whose
of
clearly
established
the
Supreme Court
recently noted
"general statements
of
giving
fair
and
clear
in the
immunity context,
warning,
may apply
question, even
though the
As
to the
very action
general
decisional law
specific conduct
in
in question has
not
-16-16-
S. Ct.
1219, 1227
In the
nothing
in the
absence
instant
and internal
of
exigent
circumstances
record suggests
any exigency,
and
let
day on summary
warrantless,
suspect's
judgment
non-consensual
home in order
procure
home
the
entry
by
to arrest him.
576 (1980).
the
police
See
___
Of course,
into
Payton v. New
______
___
id. at 603.
___
person's
________
of effecting the
arrest.
home
____
without
contradistinction
circumstances.
See
___
to
consent,
an
arrest
search
warrant),
third
_____
warrant
or
See
___
(in
exigent
In
established
plaintiff,
defendant
this case
rule
laid
down by
the
Steagald
________
the clearly
Court.
officers entered
circumstances.
warrant for
To
her
home
without her
be sure,
the defendants
Lance Joyce,
The
Yet the
consent,
any exigent
had an
arrest
but that
is
-17-17-
In
from
this
heavily
poor-quality
cloth,
the en
as misplaced.
banc
court
relies
on United States v.
______________
stands only for the proposition that when the police confront
they may
pursue and
arrest her.
See id.
___ ___
at 42-43.
That
court's reasoning).
First,
under Steagald,
________
warrantless non-consensual
circumstances.
circumstances:
the hot
case,
for
fact
by contrast, there is
pursuit
hot, cold,
simply no evidence
or lukewarm.
from a
In this
of any need
cognizable exigency.
v. Curzi, 867
_____
F.2d
36, 40-43,
officers
43 n.6
cannot use
(1st Cir.
exigent
1989) (explaining
circumstances that
that police
they
have
-18-18-
Second,
and
equally
important,
the
record
is
pellucid
that Lance
was
not in
public place
when
the
door,
he remained
exterior
weather
entirely shut.
Santana
_______
door
between
himself
house and
and
the
kept an
officers
does not
police
turn on
whether the
individual
whom the
difference.3
third
parties'
homes
followed
and
Santana,
_______
Steagald,
________
Payton,
______
a case
emerged
interpreted
in
Steagald,
________
Santana.
_______
451 U.S.
in which
warrantless invasions of
at
214
the Supreme
Rather
case
that
than extending
n.7, 222,
reinforces
Court concluded
that
against which
at
omitted).
585
Amendment
house."
(citation
has drawn
Id. at 590.
___
Consequently,
firm line
at
445 U.S.
"the
the entrance
Fourth
to
the
____________________
3.
directed at individuals
subject
to
intense
constitutional
established in
(1995), pertains
requirement
to
scrutiny.
"knock
announce,"
is within a dwelling.
special
and
The
those persons
requirement to
in terms of the
who are
within a
on the
-19-19-
this point.
1388 (7th
two
See
___
feet into
the
home; it
drew the
line
F.2d 1376,
line one or
at the
home's
6.1(e)
Nor
should we.
In
third
party's
warrant, or
home
in
the absence
of
consent,
violated Steagald
________
Amendment rights.
a search
Fourth
By
on
denies
this point,
the
en
banc
court
not
only
hedging
the
of such incidents.
-20-20-