As a governmental actor, the court concluded Evans was subject to constitutional constraints on unreasonable searches and seizures. he court found that Evans was a “governmental actor” because he was a government employee performing investigatory-type activities for the benefit of his employer.After an evidentiary hearing spanning the course of 2 days, the district court issued a 10-page memorandum decision and order granting Davenport’s motion to suppress.Davenport filed a motion to suppress the evidence found in her purse, arguing that the search was conducted by firefighter Evans to assist the law enforcement officers and, therefore, violated her constitutional rights. As a result of finding the drugs and paraphernalia in Davenport’s purse, the State charged Davenport with one count of possession of methamphetamine and one count of unlawful use of drug paraphernalia.Steinlage testified that Davenport did not give permission for the emergency personnel to search her purse and that when she saw them searching it as she was leaving the house, she asked them what they were doing. While the search was happening, AMR personnel carried Davenport out of the basement to the ambulance. Also inside the purse was a Victoria’s Secret bag, where firefighter Evans found a crack pipe, a syringe, and a baggie of crystal-like substance later identified as methamphetamine. Steinlage’s report and testimony reflected that the firefighters first located Davenport’s driver’s license from inside the purse and confirmed her name and date of birth. ![]() Steinlage testified that while he was on the patio at the time of the search, he did not direct the search. Evans eventually located the purse outside the house on the back patio, where he searched it with firefighter Ryder and Deputy Steinlage present. Dodds directed firefighter Evans to locate Davenport’s purse to search for her identification and prescription medications. Fire Department Lieutenant Dodds testified that Davenport told him that her identification was in her purse.They each explained that standard procedure for a medical response call was to search for a person’s identification and prescription medications if no one was able to provide that information. In contrast, the firefighters generally testified that Davenport was not responsive to their questions and provided them no relevant information.Dodds testified that his incident report indicated that Davenport told him that she drank very little and did not use illegal drugs and that someone at the residence informed him that Davenport had an allergy to Percocet and took ADD medication. The homeowner, McRoberts, also testified that Davenport gave the emergency personnel her name. Sherriff’s Deputy Steinlage testified that Davenport told Fire Department Lieutenant Dodds her name and date of birth.It is unclear from the record how much Davenport was able to communicate to the emergency personnel, who were asking her about her identity and medical history. They helped her exit the shower and get dressed. When the emergency personnel arrived, Davenport was still in the shower complaining that bugs were crawling on her skin and scratching at herself.When AMR personnel arrived, the firefighters turned over the care of Davenport to them. ![]() ![]() Shawnee County Sherriff’s Deputy Aaron Steinlage and American Medical Response (AMR) personnel arrived at the scene shortly after the firefighters. Shawnee Heights Firefighters Lieutenant Brian Dodds (the duty officer at the time), Dustin Evans, and Charles Ryder were the first to arrive at the residence to render medical aid.McRoberts’ granddaughter called 911 when she determined that Davenport was in need of medical help. On September 19, 2014, Davenport drove to Maurine McRoberts’ home and asked to use the shower in the walk-out basement McRoberts consented.The facts as explained by the Court of Appeals are as follows: That reality was affirmed last week by the Kansas Court of Appeals in a criminal case, State v. The limitations of the 4 th Amendment thusly do apply to us. ![]() I know we don’t think of ourselves this way, but firefighters are governmental agents. The 4 th Amendment does not mention that it is limited to searches conducted by police officers, it refers to searches performed by government. If we come across something illegal – let’s say drugs while treating a patient – it would be by accident, not because we were “searching”, right?Īnswer: Not quite. Today’s burning question: I know that police can violate a person’s Fourth Amendment rights by conducting a search without a warrant, but can a firefighter? I mean, our job is not to investigate crimes and arrest people.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |