United States v. Najar

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the officers’ search was confined “to only those places inside the home where an emergency would reasonably be associated”
• concluding that officers' “response to a 911 call where the occupant repeatedly refused to answer the telephone or the door” supported reasonable belief that warrantless entry was immediately necessary to provide aid
• holding officers were entitled to search areas where a person needing assistance could be found
• recognizing the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals followed the three-part test before Brigham City
• explaining that this prong is primarily a question of scope
• commenting on the Fourth-Amendment concerns of “friction between individual liberties and the need for prompt decisive government action” and “buffering investigatory zeal with judicial oversight”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).