Welsh v. Wisconsin
Citation: 466 U.S. 740 (1984)
Facts
Welsh drove erratically and stalled his car in a field. After a witness called police, officers went to Welsh’s home without a warrant and arrested him in his bedroom for driving under the influence — a noncriminal (civil) traffic offense in Wisconsin at the time.
Issue
Does the hot pursuit or exigent circumstances exception justify a warrantless in-home arrest for a minor, nonjailable offense?
Holding
No. The government’s interest in hot pursuit of a suspect is insufficient to justify a warrantless home entry when the offense is minor and carries no possibility of jail. An important factor in the exigent circumstances analysis is the gravity of the offense.
Rule
Gravity of offense limitation on exigency: When the underlying offense for which a warrantless home entry is sought is a minor one — particularly one that carries only civil or minor criminal penalties — the exigency justification is weak and will rarely support warrantless entry. Hot pursuit justifies warrantless home entry primarily for serious crimes (violent felonies, significant misdemeanors).
Significance
- Establishes that the seriousness of the offense is a factor in the exigent circumstances analysis
- Limits Warden v. Hayden’s hot pursuit doctrine to serious offenses
- Overturned the warrantless arrest based on a civil offense; the privacy interests in the home are at their highest
- Applied in assessing whether exigency is sufficient to justify any particular type of warrantless entry