California Legal Brief

The Rule of People v. Perez is that police officers may not order a person out of a residence based solely on reasonable suspicion without probable cause and a warrant, even when the officers remain outside the residence, under circumstances where the person is seized while still inside the home.

Appeal from judgment after guilty plea in Superior Court of Orange County.

Defendant Appellant was Ulises Perez — the individual who was inside a residence when officers ordered him out without probable cause or a warrant based on 911 calls reporting he had placed a gun in a white car.

Plaintiff Respondent was The People — the State prosecuting firearm and drug offenses.

The suit sounded in criminal law involving firearm and drug possession charges.

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were officers responded to 911 calls reporting a man with a gun who placed it in a white Kia. Officers located Perez matching the description inside an apartment, ordered him out at gunpoint without probable cause or a warrant, handcuffed him outside, and conducted searches that revealed firearms and drugs. Perez was a convicted felon prohibited from possessing firearms.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court denied Perez's suppression motion under Penal Code section 1538.5, ruling that Perez had been properly detained based on reasonable suspicion.

The key question(s) on Appeal: Whether officers violated the Fourth Amendment by ordering Perez out of a residence without probable cause and without a warrant when he was seized while still inside the home.

The Appellate Court held that Perez's in-residence seizure was unconstitutional because Terry stops based on reasonable suspicion do not apply to in-home searches and seizures, and an in-home arrest requires both probable cause and a warrant even if officers remain outside, requiring suppression of evidence obtained from his person, his statements, and his in-field identification.

The case is inapplicable when officers are already lawfully inside a residence, when there is probable cause to arrest, when there are exigent circumstances, when there is a warrant, or when the seizure occurs entirely outside the residence without first ordering the person out from inside.

The case leaves open whether officers could rely on good faith exception for warrantless in-residence seizures, and does not address situations involving consent to enter or other exceptions to the warrant requirement beyond exigent circumstances.