Hayat v. Diaz: Maryland police got a “priority” 911 call about a possible kidnapping, in which someone saw a man yelling at children while ordering them into the trunk of a vehicle. The witness provided the license number and officers tracked the vehicle (a Tesla which has rear-facing “jump” seats in the trunk area) to Hayat. They arrived at Hayat’s home, where he and his wife were on the porch. After some questions about a kidnapping, Hayat tried to retreat inside, insisting the police had no basis to enter the home without a warrant. Police prevented Hayat from closing the door, forced their way in, and investigated.
There was no kidnapping.
Hayat sued the police, arguing they had violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The district court granted the officers’ motion to dismiss, concluding that they had reasonable suspicion of a kidnapping and otherwise acted properly under the Fourth Amendment.
On appeal, a divided Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal. First, the court concluded that the officers had reasonable suspicion to believe a kidnapping had taken place, based not only on the initial report, but by follow-up interviews with the original witness (a different person had called 911) and Hayat’s conduct when they arrived, which was deflective and suspicious. Second, Second, the court concluded that what occurred on the porch was a Terry stop, becoming such when Hayat tried to retreat into his home and he was ordered not to. Third, the court held that the officers were justified by continuing into Hayat’s home, given the exigent circumstances that were present.
Judge Berner dissented, arguing that the initial encounter was consensual (which Hayat had the right to terminate) and that the majority erred by “creating a rules that an incomplete Terry stop is enough to permit police officers to enter an individual’s home” in “blatant conflict with minimum protections of the Fourth Amendment.”
