I appeared in the United States Court of Appeals yesterday to argue an issue addressing the continuing erosion of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects our rights as individuals to be free from unlawful searches and seizures by law enforcement. A search of a person’s home without a search warrant is presumed unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Generally, evidence obtained as a result of a warrantless search cannot be used against an individual in court.
However, there are several exceptions to the search warrant requirement which can allow law enforcement to enter a home even without a search warrant in connection with criminal activity such as when law enforcement is pursuing a person or upon a belief that evidence might be destroyed – such as drugs. But this was not the situation when law enforcement entered my client’s home.
The facts of my client’s case are public record. A shed had caught fire in a rural area. Firemen and law enforcement reported to the scene. The shed that was on fire was located some distance behind the house; the house was in no danger of catching fire. Fireman learned upon arrival that a neighbor who reported the fire had moved a truck that was previously close to the burning shed. There was a dog in the cab of the truck and the neighbor found a rifle lying on the ground. None of the residents of the house could be located. The house itself was dark. There were no lights on inside the house. There was no sound coming from the house. The house was locked. There was no report of anyone injured or in need of assistance. Despite that there was no evidence of a crime, law enforcement thought that the situation was suspicious with a shed fire, a dog in the truck and a rifle on the ground. Law enforcement used keys found in the truck to enter my client’s house.
Law enforcement entered my client’s home without obtaining a search warrant claiming that they thought there was a possibility that someone might be hurt or injured inside the house. Since when does the possibility that a person might be injured justify law enforcement entering a person’s locked house without a warrant? Since when can law enforcement enter our homes without a search warrant when they are not investigating criminal activity? This is exactly the issue I argued at the Court of Appeals.
The community caretaker exception arguably allows law enforcement to enter a person’s home when there is no evidence of a crime; however, in order for the community caretaker exception to apply, law enforcement must reasonably believe an emergency exists. In this instance, there was no emergency. Law enforcement never articulated what was the emergency that justified entry into the house. Law enforcement was on the property for nearly an hour before attempting to enter the house which seems like an unreasonably long time to wait before entering a house if there is truly an emergency requiring immediate action. The evidence itself, or more importantly, the lack of evidence, suggests that there was no emergency. The officer’s belief that an emergency existed was unreasonable. What if my client simply left the house to go to the grocery store or to dinner?
The Court of Appeals does not issue immediate rulings. I will be waiting to learn the outcome. But, the continuing expansion of the community caretaker exception to the warrant requirement should be a concern to all of us who value our liberty interests to be free from governmental intrusion into our lives and home.
Scott Hamblin is a lawyer and shareholder in the law firm of Brydon Swearengen & England P.C. Scott regularly practices in the area of criminal law and family law. For more information regarding your rights, please contact Scott at scotthamblinlaw.com or you mail email Scott at scotthamblin@brydonlaw.com.
A Jefferson City man faced DUI charges following a field sobriety test. Charges against the defendant were dropped after Scott successfully maintained the client’s claims that the test results were inaccurate. While the client initially appeared to be in a difficult situation, Scott was able to push investigators to determine the sobriety test results as invalid, so the charges were dismissed.
A mother was seeking sole custody of her children following a divorce. The father refused to cooperate, leaving the client in a difficult situation as she felt as though her children didn’t have a voice. Scott recognized her need for an advocate and carefully listened to the children’s wishes, which conclusively helped the client achieve sole custody of her children and protected their best interests.
A client from Fulton was accused of drug possession as a result of a home search. While drug charges may potentially be filed as a Class C felony involving severe consequences, Scott was able to help the client receive a reduced sentence. Ultimately, the client faced significantly smaller penalties compared to the initial charges.
Scott assisted a defendant in a particularly challenging divorce case in which the other spouse was not cooperating. Scott was able to help the client avoid court through an aggressive legal approach to resolve all outstanding disagreements while maintaining the client’s long-term needs.
One client sought legal assistance after an altercation with another individual in Jefferson City. The client was arrested on assault charges despite allegedly not starting the fight. Since an arrest can lead to life-altering penalties such as being terminated from employment and serving jail time, Scott was able to build a solid legal defense in the client’s favor and argued in favor of the client’s innocence.
A grandparent sought visitation rights to his grandchild after the parent tried to block him. Scott takes grandparents’ rights very seriously, and so he devised a strategy to help the grandparent set a visitation schedule. Scott developed a strategy to show that the child’s best interests were fulfilled through the grandparent’s ability to visit the child, helping push the case towards a resolution in the client’s favor.
Scott assisted a client who was injured in a car accident due to another driver’s negligence. The defendant claimed that the opposing party using their phone at the time of the crash, and Scott emphasized this claim to show that the other driver was at fault for the client’s injuries. The case concluded with the client receiving the necessary compensation for medical bills following a long hospital stay due to injuries.
My husband and I hired Mr Hamblin for a criminal matter that happen to me by accident I had some issues that happen and I have never been in any trouble. However I did some research on criminal defense attorneys and Mr. Hamblin named appeared. I did some research on him and found that he use to be a prosecuting attorney. Any way making a long story short we hired Mr . Hamblin for my defense lawyer,he did not judge me for what had happened, he provided me with straight foward answers and he knew the law very well I…
Helped my family with a variety of issues!
Scott Hamblin represented my company in a civil litigation. He was incredibly responsive and knowledgeable. His incredible passion to do the very best for his clients was not only apparent it was effective when we were able to gain the results we were looking for. I highly recommend Scott Hamblin for your legal needs.
My husband and I have used Scott as our lawyer for adoption , he was very professional as well as caring in the case. He also helped us with our personal Wills, Durable Power of Attorney, and our Health Directives. He is very thorough and explains everything step by step, and answers any questions you may have to make you feel 100% secure. We would use Scott for all and any matters requiring a lawyer. Thank you Scott, you are a top notch lawyer.
Scott did an excellent job. He was available as needed and always listened. He responded quickly to e-mails or phone calls. He didn't just "tell me what to do." Instead, he listened to my input and helped me make informed decisions. I always felt as though he had time for me as a client.
Scott is very compassionate but honest man. I have known Scott for 10+ years. I met him while fostering children with Cole County Childrens Division. When he became the adoption lawyer for Cole Couuty Childrens Division in 2007 my husband and I was one of the first to use him to become adoptive parents to our then two year old foster son. Our son just turned 13 years old this year. In 2013, he represented my husband and I to get guardianship for our foster daughter. We are beyond blessed to have such a great guy like Scott to represent…
Exceptional to work with, easy to talk to and extremely efficient. We have used Scott on two major issues now and have walked away both times more than satisfied. If someone has a significant legal issue pressing, Scott Hamblin, without question is who they need representing them.
I have used Scott Hamblin as my attorney for several different issues. He did a great job. Should you need a lawyer, Scott is an excellent choice.
Scott was knowledgeable of the law and provided support and honest counsel as my divorce attorney. I would highly recommend him to others.

For accessible and experienced representation, contact attorney Scott Hamblin today.