Case v. Montana
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Case v. Montana and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Case v. Montana.
In Case v. Montana, the Supreme Court addressed the Fourth Amendment's emergency aid exception. Montana police entered William Case's home without a warrant after receiving a report of a potential suicide. The Court affirmed the Montana Supreme Court's decision, applying the Brigham City standard of objective reasonableness for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Case v. Montana.
The Court held that Brigham City’s objective reasonableness standard for warrantless home entries to render emergency aid applies without further gloss and was satisfied in this case.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Case v. Montana. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Search and Seizure is relevant to Case v. Montana
The case primarily deals with the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement and its exceptions, specifically the emergency aid exception.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)“[S]earches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable” under the Fourth Amendment.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Case v. Montana
The case involves the procedural aspect of how the police can enter a home without a warrant, which ties into procedural due process considerations.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The officers’ decision to enter his home to prevent that result was reasonable.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Case v. Montana that support the summary and concepts above.
“[S]earches and seizures inside a home without a warrant are presumptively unreasonable” under the Fourth Amendment.
Brigham City asked simply whether an officer had “an objectively reasonable basis for believing” that entry was direly needed to prevent or deal with serious harm.
The officers here had an “objectively reasonable basis for believing” that their entry was needed to prevent Case from ending his life.
