State of Florida, Petitioner v. Christopher Markus, Respondent

Summary

The court held that hot pursuit did not justify the warrantless entry into the home, search, and arrest because the suspected offense was a minor, nonviolent misdemeanor and the evidence was outside the home and readily retrievable. It disapproved the contrary rule that any jailable misdemeanor automatically supports hot pursuit, approved the district court's suppression ruling, and reversed the conviction. Justice Canady, dissenting, would have held that a suspect may not defeat a properly initiated public-place arrest by fleeing into a private place, regardless of whether the offense was a misdemeanor.