Reply #137: Yes, it is one when the cops saw the suspect, the one that

[merh]

was participating in the drug deal they were chasing, run into one of two apartments.

You did read the case, didn't you?

I don't agree with Ginsburg, the court did nothing new today. They merely reviewed the facts of the case at hand and applied existing law while explaining constitutional safeguards. Heck, they even cited to existing Supreme Court cases which have discussed and/or explained the exigent circumstances rule. (Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U. S. 398; Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U. S. 385)

All the court did today is say the cops did not manufacture the exigent circumstances under the facts of this case.