I would argue to the contrary and here is why:
If the LEOs had busted in for the purpose of securing a "tactical advantage" and then spotted a pile of illegal drugs on the table -- these people would have been arrested. AND it would have been upheld as a legal "search"
If LEOs can invade your home for "tactical" reasons -- then they are being permitted to conduct a warrantless search.
This ruling expands existing "emergency' entries beyond the well being of persons n the property -- and into mere convenience for LE.
Just kinda shooting the breeze off the top of my head.
[ If LEOs can invade your home for “tactical” reasons — then they are being permitted to conduct a warrantless search. ]
They were doing “tactical excersizes” in the area and based off a tip they could bust into ANYONE’s home....
“If LEOs can invade your home for “tactical” reasons — then they are being permitted to conduct a warrantless search.”
Well, if as you wrote, they could seize and prosecute any “evidence” they see in your home - incident to the “invasion” - then it certainly is a “warrantless” search.
I am wondering if they justified this as the equivalent to “commandeering” someone’s vehicle to chase a felon? IF commandeering is a legal thing? That is what Hollywood always shows. Do you know?