Excuse of Putting a Bra On to Escape the Police Constitutes Escaping Arrest

 A woman was found guilty of "escaping arrest" after sneaking away from the police who gave her permission to put her bra on before arresting her, even if they did not physically arrest her yet

State v. Dorweiler, 2016 BL 234092, Me., No. PEN-15-228, 7/21/16.

    The Maine Supreme Court found that being in the police’s physical custody is not necessary for the purposes of an unlawful escape once the person submits to the police. The court found that the defendant was constructively seized by the police when she acquiesced by letting them into her home and submitted to their commands. The court found that the defendant’s actions and comments gave the arresting officers as much control over the situation as needed, thereby constructively arresting her. The court also ruled that the subjective intent of the arrestee is not determinative in establishing whether the person was under arrest under the escaping arrest statute.

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/State_v_Dorweiler_No_PEN15228_2016_BL_234092_Me_July_21_2016_Cour.

Knock-and-Talk Exception Does Not Allow Late Hour Entry Into Curtilage

Even under the Knock-and-Talk exception, police do not have license to enter the curtilage of a home if they subjectively plan to execute a warrantless arrest.

United States v. Lundin, 2016 BL 87041, 9th Cir., No. 14-10365, 3/22/16

     The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that Police may not use the 'knock-and-talk' exception to the warrant requirement as a pretext to enter the curtilage of a home at four a.m. This indicates that the implied license to approach a front door of a home does not apply in the dead of night, and cannot be used by police if the officers are subjectively interested in arresting, rather than speaking with, the occupant.

     The court clarified that the knock-and-talk exception only applies during 'normal waking hours,' stemming from the normal implied license extended by the homeowner to visitors. The officers were outside of that, because they knocked on the door at four a.m., not at a normal hour for visitors.

     The court cited the US Supreme Court case, Florida v. Jardines, saying that the knock-and-talk is also limited to a specific purpose. When officers approach a house to execute a warrantless arrest, it is outside the social norm that is extended to members of the public to the front door.

http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/United_States_v_Lundin_No_1410365_2016_BL_87041_9th_Cir_Mar_22_20?1462378081