Illegal Entry at its finest

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The U.S. Supreme Court refused today to block a Bay Area man's suit against police who entered his home with guns drawn after they were told had been in a traffic accident and may have been drinking.

More Bay Area News

* "No Face Bandit" gets no freedom for 12 years 04.05.10

* Supreme Court won't toss case against San Carlos cops 04.05.10

* Union City slaying victim identified 04.05.10

* S.F. crime lab figure pleads not guilty 04.05.10

Two San Carlos policemen defended their entry into Bruce Hopkins' home by claiming they feared he was in a diabetic coma and needed help. But a federal appeals court said a jury could conclude that no reasonable officer would have believed it was necessary to break into Hopkins' home and rescue him at gunpoint.

The ruling last July by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco allows Hopkins to go to trial in his suit against San Carlos and the two officers. The Supreme Court denied review of the case today without comment.

The case arose from Hopkins' August 2003 traffic accident in the San Mateo County community. Both drivers got out, looked at their cars, found no damage and left, the appeals court said. But the court said the other driver followed Hopkins home, confronted him there and then called police and said she had smelled alcohol on his breath.

Two officers went to the home, knocked and announced their presence but got no response. One then cut a hole in the screen door, and they arrested Hopkins in his bedroom at gunpoint and brought him outside in handcuffs.

A Superior Court judge dismissed charges against Hopkins, finding that police had entered his home illegally. He then sued for damages.

In seeking dismissal of the suit, the officers said they had learned in police training that someone in the early stages of a diabetic emergency might seem, to an untrained observer, to have liquor on his breath. They also argued that they were entitled to enter the home to seek evidence of possible drunken driving.

But the appeals court said the officers took no steps to learn whether Hopkins needed medical help, such as telephoning him or asking the other driver whether Hopkins showed any signs of distress.

Hopkins' lawyer, Anthony Boskovich, said today that his client, who now lives in West Virginia, lost his job after the arrest.

A lawyer for San Carlos and the officers did not immediately return telephone calls seeking comment.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/05/BAOP1CPVKV.DTL#ixzz0kGYDMMa9

This is absolutely crazy!

[Nagishkaw 510]

:blink:

[luckytxn 2,264]

The cities finest huh.

[TBoneTX 45,289]

It's amazing that any part of the Fourth Amendment isn't a mere inkblot.