Justices Hold Door Open for Police Who See Fight Indoors

Police officers may go into a home uninvited and without a search warrant to break up a fight they have seen through a window, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.

Usually, homes are off-limits to the police and government searches, except when officers have obtained a warrant from a judge. In the past, however, the court has said there is an exception for emergencies, such as a fire at the residence.

In Monday’s decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said a fight in progress is the kind of emergency that justifies quick action by the police.

“The role of a peace officer includes preventing violence and restoring order, not simply rendering first aid to casualties,” Roberts said. “An officer is not like a boxing ... referee, poised to stop a bout only if it becomes too one-sided.”

The unanimous decision overturned rulings by the Utah state courts, which held that a loud party and a drunken fight did not give police reason enough to burst into a home without a warrant.

The state’s judges said the officers in this case appeared more interested in breaking up the loud party than in aiding a seriously injured person. But Roberts said the officers’ motives did not matter. What counted, he said, were the objective facts.

“In these circumstances, the officers had an objectively reasonable basis for believing both that the injured adult might need help and that the violence in the kitchen was just beginning. Nothing in the 4th Amendment required them to wait until another blow rendered someone ‘unconscious’ and ‘semi-conscious’ or worse before entering,” the chief justice wrote.

The case began in the early morning hours of July 23, 2000, when police in Brigham City, Utah, responded to a complaint about a loud party. The four officers heard shouting from inside the house, including calls to “Stop! Stop!”

When the officers walked down the driveway, they saw two juveniles drinking beer in the backyard.

From there, they saw, through a screen door and the kitchen window, another juvenile swing his fist and strike an adult in the face, drawing blood.

The officers, shouting “Police!” entered the kitchen, broke up the fight and arrested several of the adults on suspicion of being drunk and disorderly.

The adults in turn demanded that the police leave the premises.

When the Utah courts subsequently suppressed evidence against the adults obtained after the officers entered the home without a warrant, state prosecutors urged the Supreme Court to hear the case to clarify what was considered an emergency exception to the 4th Amendment.

In Brigham City vs. Stuart, Roberts said the officers did not need a warrant because they were breaking up a fight, not searching the premises.

Moreover, he said, they did not need to knock on the door before entering because they would not have been heard.

“It would serve no purpose to require them to stand dumbly at the door awaiting a response,” Roberts wrote, “while those within brawled on, oblivious to their presence.”