Opinion ID: 48719
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Michigan v. Summers

Text: 15 In Summers, the Supreme Court recognized a specific exception to the general principle that a warrantless police seizure of a person requires probable cause by holding that a valid search warrant implicitly carries with it the limited authority to detain the occupants of the premises while a proper search is conducted. 452 U.S. at 705, 101 S.Ct. 2587. The Summers court began with the recognition that certain types of police detention constitute such limited intrusions on the personal security of those detained and are justified by such substantial law enforcement interests that they may be made on less than probable cause. Id. at 699, 101 S.Ct. 2587. After balancing the intrusion imposed by detaining the occupants of a residence subject to search pursuant to a lawful warrant against the law enforcement justifications for such detention, the Court concluded that this type of detention was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the connection between an occupant and the home for which the search warrant was issued gives the police officer an easily identifiable and certain basis for determining that suspicion of criminal activity justifies a detention of that occupant. Id. at 703-04, 101 S.Ct. 2587. In Anderson v. United States, 107 F.Supp.2d 191 (E.D.N.Y.2000), upon which the deputies also rely, the court applied the Summers rule to permit the detention of the other occupants of a home during the execution of a valid arrest warrant for someone reasonably believed to be one of the home's residents. 4 16 Neither Summers nor Anderson helps the deputies here. In this case, the deputies had a warrant for the arrest of Freeman's son, Kevin, who resided at 16449 County Road 15. While Summers and Anderson would authorize the deputies to detain anyone found at that address during the execution of their arrest warrant for Kevin, nothing in either of those cases provides authority for the proposition that the deputies could detain Freeman outside of her own home, 16447 County Road 15, while they inquired about Kevin's whereabouts. Because Freeman was at her own home when she was detained, and because the deputies had no right to search Freeman's home based on their arrest warrant for Kevin, 5 the detention cannot be justified under Summers.