In a recent Appellant Division case the court was required to balance a citizen’s right to prevent government’s intrusion into the home and the government’s right to continue an investigation.  In that case, police officers were summoned to an apartment owned by defendant after they received an anonymous call about an argument and probable drug sales. The  Defendant opened the door as a result of the police officer’s knock.  When the defendant recognized the police officers, he tried to slam the door shut but, before that attempt the investigating officer tried to enter the apartment.  As a result, the door hit the police officer.  The police officer then charged the Defendant with assault and searched the apartment where they found two bags of crack cocaine. 

On appeal the court noted that although the initial entry into the home was illegal, defendant did not have a right to slam the door on the police officer.  To support its ruling, the court cited a Supreme Court case which concluded that a defendant could be convicted of obstruction of justice from fleeing a stop made by a police officer, even though that stop was unconstitutional.

Unfortunately, the appellant panel overlooked a number of other Appellant Division cases that seem to move in an opposite direction.  One of those cases related to a situation where a defendant slammed a car door, almost hitting a police officer during a search.  There the Court reversed the conviction for disorderly conduct noting that the conduct was protected by the constitution.  In another case, the Court concluded that the defendant’s attempt to prevent a police officer from entering his home did not convert suspicion into probable cause to conduct a search.