Code of Criminal Procedure · States v. Santana

States v. Santana

States v. Santana is covered under States v. Santana and tested on the TCOLE peace officer licensing exam. Cadets typically encounter this topic under "Search & Seizure" on practice exams.

To prove this offense, the State must establish each of the following elements: Hot pursuit; Fleeing felon; Officers in continuous active pursuit; Warrantless entry permitted to apprehend.

Elements you must prove

  • Hot pursuit
  • Fleeing felon
  • Officers in continuous active pursuit
  • Warrantless entry permitted to apprehend

Practice 1 question on this topic

Time yourself, score your run, review missed questions with statute references — Free Practice Pass cadets get limited access.

Start Free Practice

Worked examples

Worked example 1

SCENARIO. Officers chase an armed robbery suspect on foot. The suspect runs into a nearby house and slams the door. May officers enter without a warrant?

  1. No — they always need a warrant for a home
  2. Yes — hot pursuit of a fleeing felon is an exigent circumstance allowing warrantless entry Correct
  3. Only with the homeowner's consent
  4. Only if they hear gunshots
Why: Hot pursuit of a fleeing felon — particularly one who is armed — is a classic exigent circumstance permitting warrantless entry into a residence to apprehend.
Statute: United States v. Santana; Warden v. Hayden