t we're here because at four thirty in the morning on december twenty third two thousand and twelve three police officers threaten arrest my client if you didn't open his door and let him in to see if there was some spousal abuse going on in my client's home there was no warrant that's conceded there was no consent here there was no it and it has to be determined upon objective reasonableness again i understand series position on that having confirmed with the neighbor that she had heard screaming coming from the property within the hour wouldn't that be indicative of someone being hurt or possibly injured in some way i think that's their basis for eggs you can see if that isn't enough tell us why well that certainly isn't enough the is very clear on this i mean the cases that dealt with thanks engine see at least complaints or complaints of fighting all say the same thing there has to be some objective evidence not just some mere speculation oh now they're screaming going well evidence in the in the reasonable inference would be that people don't scream unless at least scream loud enough that they can be heard next door at four o'clock in the morning without there being something seriously amiss house in a suburban neighborhood when she called the nine one one operator she spoke basically said i think i heard a scream coming from the vicinity of my client of my client's home she said she didn't she said she didn't indicate whether was a scream from a male or female initially she said it might have been an injured worker in the middle of the night because there was construction going on in the on the premises  the they didn't just go to confirm the first thing they did they wife two minutes later right at the house of my client they did a perimeter search i read the record and they don't they sound right right so then they go next door and she says that she believes that she heard a sound of a person screaming from the vicinity of my client's property if they c and and pounding concussive noises you know well not really i don't think so it's you know i mean she said she heard she's heard yelling and what she thought was some kind of noise yes i don't know if it was concussive noises but it was what was told to the officers and them what their actions were in light of that so we're not asking you whether that's what happened but whether that's what she told that the that testimony officer was very unclear on this and you have to unquote recognizes that there is a presumption per se violation of the fourth amendment if you go in without a warrant and the end of the government is going to be foreign forces is going to be relying on an exception they have a heavy burden of us that wishing it by real evidence so you have a screen someone could have dropped something on their toe in front of a jury that assessed the sentence yes a circumstances the feds this court has an obligation to do it in over a review of the record so we have to find we have to decide whether any reasonable jury could have so concluded that's part of it your honor but really it's whether you can right there two minutes earlier it is completely silent and they come and they get to the door and they want to see everybody in the premises and you're one of the plaintiffs explains that his wife is bad very direct right  and they thought based on his demeanor and what the neighbor had told them that they couldn't rely on that that's that's that's the yes that's the tell us what's wrong what's wrong with that is they they admit to police officers mit going back to the screen that until they met with my client they did not have probable cause nor were their exit insert the object of standard so that the question is not what they believed but why did they get it or didn't go ahead that's correct but if they were there and they talked to this witness who is somewhat unbelievable thinking there was construction work going on at three o'clock in the morning and so you had understand that we have to accept the facts in the light most favorable to the jury  it's unbelievable but we have to assume the jury believed yes but you have to look at the totality of the circumstances around there if this were a criminal case and this is the same standard the fact that you would allow a search based on one person's remark that there was a scream coming from the vicinity of someone's house to hear screaming or screaming it was a it's unclear if she said a scream from the vicinity then she said later on they were screaming since three o'clock in the morning that was never told to the police officers when you look at the testimony about what police officers were told that she heard screaming while she was and it woke her u screaming well he heard people fighting two people voices she's wanted it might have been injured worker she never said that to a spousal abuse i mean his basis for going in people can be doing work and inappropriate hour on their own home pounding and for nailing things in and and constructing constructing things that doesn't assist one thirty in the morning even would be something you'd call the police to complain about isn't it but that was reason that was not the reason that the lieutenant gave for going into this house that's right because the lieutenant disregarded the idea that the either that the banging was it was caused by construction or decide if it was caused by construction that's not a basis of his entering some time without a warrant but he spoke to one witness and his statement was that he believed that there was a possibility that there could be some unusual behavior at four o'clock in the morning screaming which is suggestive of some someone possibly being injured and then going to the location and the individual not only being animated but according to the officers yelling and ordering him off the property and they wanted to see everybody in the premises and when he told them the wife couldn't go to the come to the door which turned out to be because she was bedridden but they were suspicious that it could be because she was injured but now why is why does that not allow the jury to conclude that they acted reasonably because you know there is a purse say violation of the fourth amendment if you don't get a warrant and like someone was working late at night they could have gotten a warrant last year exigent circumstances and the jury was satisfied that there were the jury you the charges were correct the jury was confused i've done a lot of cases on of my over the years you never can tell what a jury does we have a right to have this court take a look a confirms that she heard a scream ing at the house next door she's adamant that it's a human it's not anything else he goes to the house he locks on the they knock on door it takes several minutes understandable mr dulles found peers now today have now been operating with the fact that there is this screaming from the south around the south and  she's an invalid so of course that's what you find out later but what that now all those things trigger the police what are they supposed to do at four o'clock in the morning in a neighborhood like this and  not a neighborhood that's prone to anything like this and they end up with a very uncooperative person at the door who will not bring the woman to the door for whatever reason will not let them in a store where they have no choice specialism out of the fourth and then i think that's a little cocoon and i think so explain why why i should draw any inference from inference from the fact that it's a wealthy neighborhood well because i i think there are neighborhoods agitated way merely said no please get a warrant would that have rendered this and exigent circumstance that would have permitted the officers to come in well i can't answer that i don't know whether they could even get one at that hour by that time i don't know just very quickly this this and this is a frequent just made it very clear that the essential question of determining exigent circumstances to justify warrantless entry is whether the law enforcement agents were confronted by an urgent need to render aid or take action and except for very limited delineated circumstances the police bear a heavy burden when attempting to demonstrate an urgent need that might justify the warrantless search or arrest let me ask you the question that i think was put in the very first form by one of my colleagues what if the police had gotten to the location and there was screaming going on well that gets a close r question there are cases that deal with this right ok now you said that they got there within two minutes the of the neighbors call and the call and she reported there'd been screaming going on since three o'clock in the morning now there's silence why couldn't police have a reasonable concern that there was someone injured who might need help they might have a concern but that's a subject of concern not based on any real evidence it's not a test been screaming going on since what they did walk in the morning now there's silence and there is a person who is in the premises they know that a wife who the husband says cannot come to the door yes and your hon there is not a single case that has a single scream of one neighbor which is nothing more than really a noise complaint that says that that justifies a warrantless search of someone's home at four thirty in the morning on the mantle and i knew whether or not it was how it could be that you could argue that no reasonable jury could think that they had an objectively reasonable belief that somebody might have been injured and wanted their hello's as a matter of law if they thought exactly what you said that is insufficient as a matter of law to establish exiting circumstances period full stop there was no urgent need for anything and in fact she never said she suspected spousal abuse where did this come from foot in the door threatened to arrest him then he went into the house he looks in the house he looks around there's still no evidence of anything he sees in pajamas he was sleeping this was a complaint made about two minutes ago the police make him go into his wife's room with him he goes to work we actually do i'm sorry have the record and thank you we have read this i appreciate it thank you both very much reserve decision