them and can find them whenever standards apply when it whether it's the strictest released strict standard those standards were not met in this case and it was clear and that's because the worst no that she was probably going to do anything but requested a welfare check this grid and did make a number of calls the police department claimed about their lack of response to her complaint early in the day the police went to her home spoke with her and in their own notes say that she seemed to be ok they left a miscreant was hostile towards the police she didn't want them there nothing to indicate that she presented any kind of threat to anyone and then nothing nothing changed over the next couple of hours other than it is grim made some other folk calls complaining to the police but nothing developed to indicate that she presented any kind of danger to herself or others that could remotely justify sergeant shannon barnett the minneapolis police department ordering before they got to the house that she be it clear that she made that decision even before she storm is graham again it's in the electronic communications that she had ordered a mental health holds a dispatcher called up from minneapolis called up the diner least a person said don't worry better anymore we're going to ever be tane under mental health holds so so they decide to hold a competitor because they found her to be annoying she was making a lot of phone calls maybe it's a tough part of the job for circumstances this community caretaking exemption is being blown up to a point where it's completely way beyond any kind of remote look ability like this city has some kind of petrol exception to justify this violation of the citizen drugs community caretaker exception and it's a narrow doctrine that cannot should not be used as some kind of a catchall exception to justify the  letting the fundamental constitutional civil liberties protections whenever they have some kind of will that tells them to do so is miss graham can affirm that she was ok again they might not unlike the way she interact with them but she responded to the police told them she was fine she didn't want them there there was no those specific information that she had threatened her and then he wondered that was she was going to harm herself or there was any reason that the police had to enter her home against her permission another community caretaking case is there specific reports of someone threatening themselves or others cold here or not responsive some kind of factor where the police needed to be concerned that there might be a danger and they needed to check on they'd say this was a case where the the factual right up in front of the similarly there was no no basis whatsoever to bring her to our house but the purpose of that is if someone presents a danger to themselves or others ers are unable to care for themselves there were you know there  any sort of physical harm or was going to harm herself her house was very neat perfect order she was in control of her situation and no one else in aroused that she could have harmed and no indication that she was going to hurt herself all she could do was continue to call the police when claire complained about their behavior which is something that whether she's right or wrong she has a right to do as a us citizen  so we're asking the court to reverse to reverse the district court's decision you don't i think it would be helpful for the court to make it clear that probable cause is question i think you just made an interesting point if if i heard you right you said that he would like us to make clear that probable cause is the standard does that necessarily mean that the law is unclear in that i think there are i think there's there's language is some of the cases that could be that isn't as precise as it should be but i don't i don't think that there's any cases that that well and good for us but for officers who are on the feel it seems like a lot to ask for them to interpret our and then us language over the years the record you know i didn't set the this and also think that what's critical that whatever standard applied here and i think the standard here unfortunate got muddled by the district court the district court should have determined that under any standard that there was no grounds for the to enter the homes or to detain or you had nothing to indicate that there was any kind of danger that she presented at the time were that there was something that would make them a mental health holds a pluggable in this in this sort of situation  if everyone who was the very one who has some kind of a mental health issue you know could be could find you know there wouldn't be any room in the hospitals police officers standard and when you look at short and she had it but it's deposition testimony she couldn't provide anything specific to indicate that ms graham presented a danger she had honestly believed she said she believed that in a mental health crisis she couldn't supply what a mental health crisis was and we wonder around in circles in her deposition were for many minutes she couldn't come up with any kind of specific criteria for mental health crisis court i'm going to just jump right in and star with this dispute over the standard that the court should apply to the community community care taking exception to the warrant requirement  and i think the core really put it on on the issue and it's questions of mr cushion are there are there is a lot of case law on this topic and i think it  that was two thousand and twelve i believe the citations in our brief of course in the in the burr case this or said with a cliche that the reasonable belief standard applies to the community care  previous u s supreme court cases that included michigan the long and maryland hooey and both of those cases are reasonable articulable suspicion  taking laded and no one certain term that the appropriate standard is the reasonable belief standard so we have those three cases which are clear and there's no muddied water so the question reasonable cause to believe and the court rightly said well i can't really tell if that's reasonable belief that unless it is that in standard or probable cause it's important on that point though that they hear it speak perch case was a good thing a defense case it was not based on whether there was an actual violation of the th amendment and so the standard applied the reasonable belief stand would we be the only circuit that had that standard as opposed to probable cause i believe so your honor i certainly if there is another circuit it  is it's only one or two i mean there is mr kushner is absolutely right there is a clear majority that applies probable cause standard but the point that i think is important is that this court has applied adopted the reasonable belief standard and burke and so the court wants to revisit it has to do it on bar and so that that's not obviously the case here and i do want to go mention describing the plaintiff's arguments on the reasonableness of the seizure and the court does in that footnote say there is probable cause but what the court does not do is clearly articulate the standard that applies that for the st time only happens and burke and it's a reasonable belief standard york oh i have a question and it may just be my confusion here but hopefully things cleared out is the standard that applie taking exception to the wire amends and and intel pizarro this circuit had not decided that issue with his out of the circuit decided it on on in favor of the government exists and so there's another layer on this at all mentioned briefly and that what what is the reasonable belief standard and there are in as a circuit there don't know if you i would call it a circuit split but there are different jurisdictions that apply different standards to reasonable belief i think for what this court did with the burke case and citing michigan of the long and maryland  we is basically adopts a reasonable articulable suspicion standard now some courts have held that reasonable belief is actually lower than reasonable articulable suspicion i i don't think we need to press differently than community care take in emergency aid requires exigent circumstances community care taking as nat and that community care taking does require the existence of an carvey now that separate exception as this court has done and the community care taking exception and it has had basically room it has by necessity removed that were choir minutes and it is soda which is neighboring minneapolis the driver was arrested and she was under the community care taking exception and she was seized put in a squad  no doubt there was a seizure and she was taken to a detox facility there was no imminent risk to her danger she was ten to her safety she was ten blocks away from home she was moderately intoxicated in fact she had a blood alcohol level point zero away there was a grocery store across the street that she could have gone to her husband was on the way nevertheless the officer waited three minutes and took her seized her and took and and took custody of or there was no imminent threat to her her safety that there and i think if you look at the other cases as well the emergency that existed and this goes straight to the qualified immunity argument for the officers because that that analysis as to whether they violated clearly established law couched with the specific facts and here are the facts we have two recent graham who who are sergeant barnett knew she knew who teresa graham was from previous interactions with her from the year before she knew based on information from and specter kept the way that teresa grand had mental health issues and that she has struggled with mental health crises in the past they had the nine  cousin and they you know nine hundred and eleven obviously we had their phone number the nine hundred and eleven caller revealed information about miss graham he said that she had called him at work and threatened him and his family described general mental health issue she had he was concerned enough to call nine hundred and eleven to ask the police to check her out and i think that's significant even though he did say he did admit  body camera footage she's moving back and forth even though the officer is standing still there is clearly something going on with her and although they also said she was a ok they also said they were living with theresa gray and so when he saw that there was no male there who lived with teresa grant he decided to leave now after that happens miss graham does a variety of things she and warned that she might fight with the police so there we have two elements of being a threat the threat to the cousin and the call to the and the call from the relative to a guy i know that she might talk to the police and then you can see or calling nine hundred and eleven which frankly does not make sense because nine hundred and eleven is right at the doorstep and in fact oscar sanchez states we are nine hundred and eleven and so we see all of this when you put all of this together it's more than sufficient facts to suggest that ms graham probable cause or reasonable belief wasn't a mental health crisis there was a real emergency and she needed help and the burden on her was just a trip by ambulance being escorted by paramedics not have you not police officers so if you look at the burden on her it was just a transportation by ambulance to the hospital and with that your honor i would suggest that there is clear evidence that there that the officers had a standard to seize her and her home in clearly it is not the case that only a plainly improper an officer would have hole it doesn't deal in all of the mental health tension so there isn't anything on the books to suggest that less than probable to support that less than probable cause is needed for an involuntary mental health confinement law enforcement arrest so as to the reasonable as to the community care taking exception to enter the home that just doesn't and under any reasonable construction of the case law there isn't anything that approaches what happened in was going to harm herself so there wasn't any grounds and to the polls because they knew she was there and she made clear she was ok you know whether she was totally healthy or not you know that's not the issue here get the being