Opinion ID: 901816
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Constitutional Protection Against Search of a Home Without a Warrant

Text: [¶ 76.] The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article VI, § 11 of the South Dakota Constitution provide: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrant(s) shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. In Hess, Justice Konenkamp reiterated that, except for specifically limited exceptions, every law enforcement entry into a home for the purpose of search and seizure must be made with a warrant. 2004 SD 60, ¶ 22, 680 N.W.2d at 324-25. The warrant requirement was explained as follows: We earlier noted that the Fourth Amendment guarantees the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. As the United States Supreme Court explained, `physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed[.]' Accordingly, it is well established that `searches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable.' Generally, this means that, with some specifically delineated exceptions, every law enforcement entry into a home for the purpose of search and seizure must be made with a warrant. The State has the burden of proving that a specific search falls into a delineated and limited exception. Legal analysis is limited to `the facts perceived by the police at the time of the entry, not as subsequently uncovered.' Id. ¶¶ 22-23 (internal citations omitted). [¶ 77.] The emergency and exigent circumstances exceptions are two of the delineated and limited exceptions permitting warrantless entry into a home. Id. ¶ 24. The United States Supreme Court and this Court have recognized and applied the emergency and exigent circumstances exceptions. Mincey, 437 U.S. at 392, 98 S.Ct. at 2413; Hess, 2004 SD 60, ¶ 24, 680 N.W.2d at 325 (citing Payton, 445 U.S. at 590, 100 S.Ct. at 1382; Warden v. Hayden, 387 U.S. 294, 87 S.Ct. 1642, 18 L.Ed.2d 782 (1967); Heumiller, 317 N.W.2d at 129 (citations omitted)).