People v. Hannah

In People v. Hannah (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 1335 (Hannah), officers serving an arrest warrant on a juvenile arrived at an apartment and told the occupants to remain seated. Based on the defendant's dilated eyes, the officers suspected him of being under the influence of drugs, and they attempted to arrest him. After a struggle, they succeeded in doing so. ( Id. at p. 1339.) After discussing Summers, and Glaser, inter alia, the court found the detention reasonable. With regard to the crucial distinguishing fact of the lack of a search warrant, the court said: "None of these cases require the existence of a search warrant for contraband as a prerequisite to finding the detention of an individual to be reasonable. The existence of a warrant is but one factor the courts consider when determining the governmental interest involved." ( Hannah, supra, 51 Cal.App.4th at p. 1343.) The court went on to hold, "Objectively, it is reasonable for a police officer who is in a residence attempting to execute an arrest warrant to determine who is present. This is true even when he does not reasonably believe any one of them is the subject of the arrest warrant. . . . There was a legitimate governmental interest in detaining defendant to determine who he was and if he had any information concerning the juvenile they were searching for, while the other officers searched the apartment. In addition, the detention was reasonably necessary to ensure defendant did not warn the juvenile or assist him in evading arrest." ( Id. at pp. 1345-1346.)