State v. DeMarco

Summary

The court reversed the Appellate Court’s judgment and held that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless entry into his home. It clarified that factual findings underlying an emergency-doctrine ruling are reviewed for clear error, while the legal conclusion that an emergency existed is reviewed de novo, with appropriate deference to credibility determinations. Applying that framework, the court concluded that the circumstances objectively supported the officers’ belief that an emergency existed and justified the entry.