Reader Ad Slot
Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
HEARNAP — Part 26
Page 442
442 / 500
th we te Se et mt ae I RSA = <a =
Legal Counsel to Mr. Adams — !
se LOS ANGELES TRIAL OF WILLIAM AND EMILY HARRIS == yj) e
@lso hard to understand how the Judge cc could tha thas, cane crc
feither Hearst or..the Narrises, had gone. “For ‘appraximat A es
‘11/2 years without indication:of violence. on their part. a,
Even if thé Judge was correct in this “statement whieh he Da :
was not, we can find no law supportive of the fact. that
a pers ¥ voided apprehension following =
Commission of a.violent_ crine(s) must be assumed. to have:
“given wu his violent propens sities if. the period folléwing .
the commission of the violent t ofine. exceeds 11/2 years. —
Notwithstanding the? Aakese, % there are numerous, - i
cases which h may be cited jin su ipport’ of principle that. law - fea
enforcement officers may enter r aaneliing “without, “a. “search ©
‘warrant’ for thé @ "purpose of making “a an arrest ‘if there o
is~probablé cause to believe that theyperson “sought to be-
axvrested” is in“the dwelling, and the existence of exigent
Siretistances “demand that action be taken_: immediately as
Opposed to delayi ing the entry for ox purpose of obtaining a
ssearcn Warrant. See. Mc Donald v. United States, 335 U.S. | ;
451 i (1948); Wardeityv. “Hayden, 38 387 U.S. 294 (1957); Dorman ° .
v. United States, 435, Fr2d 385 (D.C. Cir. 1970); Salvador
v. Unitcd States, - 505 2d 1348 (8th Cir. 1974); ana
Unitec States v. Williams, 385 F. Supp. 1400 (E.D. Mich.
974). Particular attention should be paid to a California
case, People v. Hill, 528 P. 2d 1 (1974), which noted that
police officers, under California statute, are justified in -
entering a closed residence in order to make an arrest if
the officers have reasonable grounds to believe that the
person bo. bé,arrested is inside the residence and if the o
officers, Haye “demanded admittance anc explained the purpose __
for which’ athe, admittance is sought. See also, in this |. .
connection, “eMiller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301 (1958), °°.
set forth'in Vol. 1, Manual of Instructions, Section 2,
page 5a attached. - - 47C
. _Upder the facts,.as.relay ed.to.S2 ~by..
SA ehrerber, .Judge-. Brandler's.rnling,o£.. 3/1/76 iS ine.
correct “under be both Fe Federal ang California law.
y RECOMMENDATION : _ Stes oe or Se
None. For information. .
Reveal the original PDF page, then click a word to highlight the OCR text.
Community corrections
No user corrections yet.
Comments
No comments on this document yet.
Bottom Reader Ad Slot
Bottom Reader Ad Slot placeholder
If you would like to support SpookStack without paying out of pocket, please consider allowing advertising cookies. It helps cover hosting costs and keeps the archive free to browse. You can change this choice at any time.
Continue Exploring
Reader
Topic
Agency Collection
Explore This Archive Cluster
Broad Topic Hub
Topic Hub
Related subtopics
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic
Subtopic