Celis

Suspecting defendant of drug trafficking, police officers stopped him at gunpoint behind his house, handcuffed him, and made him sit on the ground. The officers then entered defendant’s house to determine whether there was anyone inside who might endanger their safety. They did not find anyone, but they did see a large box with uniformly sized, wrapped packages that, after a search, proved to contain cocaine.

We address two issues. Was the officers’ initial seizure of defendant an arrest requiring probable cause, or was it merely a detention requiring only a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity? And was the officers’ entry into and inspection of defendant’s house permissible as a “protective sweep” under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Maryland v. Buie (1990) 494 U.S. 325 [ 108 L.Ed.2d 276 , 110 S.Ct. 1093 ] (Buie)l We conclude that defendant was initially detained, not arrested, and that the facts known to the officers fell short of those necessary to justify a Buie protective sweep.

I

Defendant was charged in San Diego County with conspiracy (Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1)) and possession of more than 20 kilograms of cocaine for sale (Health & Saf.…

Suspecting defendant of drug trafficking, police officers stopped him at gunpoint behind his house, handcuffed him, and made him sit on the ground. The officers then entered defendant's house to determine whether there was anyone inside who might endanger their safety. They did not find anyone, but they did see a large box with uniformly sized, wrapped packages that, after a search, proved to contain cocaine.

We address two issues. Was the officers' initial seizure of defendant an arrest requiring probable cause, or was it merely a detention requiring only a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity? And was the officers' entry into and inspection of defendant's house permissible as a "protective sweep" under the United States Supreme Court's decision in Maryland v. Buie (1990) 494 U.S. 325 , 110 S.Ct. 1093 , 108 L.Ed.2d 276 ( Buie )? We conclude that defendant was initially detained, not arrested, and that the facts known to the officers fell short of those necessary to justify a Buie protective sweep.

Defendant was charged in San Diego County with conspiracy (Pen.Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1)) and possession of more than 20 kilograms of cocaine for sale (Health &…

I concur in the majority’s conclusion the police entry into defendant’s home was unlawful. Unlike the majority, however, I would resolve the case simply by application of the established principle that, lacking probable cause, the officers’ warrantless entry into defendant’s home was in violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. (Minnesota v. Olson (1990) 495 U.S. 91, 100 [ 109 L.Ed.2d 85 , 110 S.Ct. 1684 ].)

In speculating about the application of Maryland v. Buie (1990) 494 U.S. 325 [ 108 L.Ed.2d 276 , 110 S.Ct. 1093 ] (Buie) to circumstances admittedly *681 not present here, i.e., to a detention outside the home when police have a reasonable suspicion that persons inside the home might pose a danger to the officers (maj. opn., ante, at pp. 678-679), the majority goes far afield. Buie is completely inapposite to this case. Buie involved a lawful arrest, pursuant to a warrant, effected inside the defendant’s home. The high court held only that, incident to such an arrest, the officers could conduct a protective sweep of the immediate area of the arrest for purposes of officer safety and, on reasonable suspicion, a protective sweep of…