Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart

Media Items
Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart - Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart - Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Paul J. Mcnulty (argued the cause for Petitioner)
Michael Patrick Studebaker (argued the cause for Respondents)
Jeffrey S. Gray (argued the cause for Petitioner)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
05-502
Petitioner: 
Brigham City, Utah
Respondent: 
Charles W. Stuart, et al.
Opinion: 
547 U.S. ___ (2006)
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Brigham City, Utah v. Stuart , 547 U.S. ___ (2006)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_05_502)
Facts of the Case: 

Responding to a complaint about a loud party, police arrived at a house where they saw minors drinking alcohol outside and heard shouting inside. As they approached the house, they saw a fight through the window involving a juvenile and four adults, one of whom was punched hard enough to make him spit blood. The officers announced their presence, but the people fighting did not hear them so they entered the home. They arrested the men for contributing to the delinquency of a minor and other related offenses. The trial court judge, however, refused to allow the evidence collected after the police entered the home because it was a warrantless search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. On appeal, the government argued that the search was covered by the "emergency aid doctrine" because the officers were responding to seeing the man be punched. The Supreme Court of Utah disagreed, however, ruling that the doctrine only applies when there is an unconscious, semiconscious, or missing person who is feared injured or dead. The Court also gave weight to the fact that the officers acted exclusively in a law enforcement capacity, not to assist the injured man.

Question: 

What objectively reasonable level of concern is necessary to trigger the emergency aid exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement?

Conclusion: 

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that police may enter a building without a warrant when they have an objectively reasonable basis to believe that an occupant is "seriously injured or threatened with such injury." Quoting from Mincey v. Arizona, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that "[t]he need to protect or preserve life or avoid serious injury is justification for what would be otherwise illegal absent an exigency or emergency."

Decisions

Decision: 8 votes for Brigham City, Utah, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Amendment 4: Fourth Amendment

Sort by Ideology

Wrote the majority opinion
Roberts
Wrote a jurisdictional dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Voted with the majority
Alito

Full Opinion by Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.

Timeplots Affiliate

Timeplots.com: A Visual History of the Supreme Court