What was the legal basis for entering his apartment without a judicial warrant?

Where were the checks and balances on the police actions?

"Where were the checks and balances on the police actions?"

Exigent circumstances? If the officers believed he was inside and possibly in distress and in need of immediate medical attention they can enter. Only a guess as I haven't seen the police report.

News report stated that landlord was in phone contact with resident who was not in his apartment and so advised the police.

I know today is Saturday and the SJMerc just put the story up today. But I'm curious as to why there has not been anything in the local news for two months on this terrible incident.

Also what were the "multitude of health and safety code violations, including fire hazards" cited by Officer Fambrini? What were the specific city codes violated? Why was it deemed necessary for a 24 hour eviction? Aren't there specific state procedures to follow for evictions?

One more question.
Why is the decision and power to evict someone from their home left in the hands of the person who deals with fences that are too high and garbage cans left out too long on the street?

More questions.
Was the MP City Attorney ever contacted by the anyone in the police department regarding the 24 hour eviction notice, prior to Spencer's death? Since his death? If so when?

Code enforcement also encompasses fence and hedge height violations on street corners, which happens to be a safety issue which could lead to he death or injury (health issue) of a pedestrian, bicyclist or vehicle operator. However the code enforcement officer does not require immediate action for this possible life and death issue. Instead the violator is given about two weeks to take corrective action and then they receive a daily fine. The violator can appeal this to the city and even to the local courts.

Was Spencer even told he had procedural and legal options? Was he even told he could remove sufficient items to a storage unit in order to conform to a subjective "code?"

Was any effort made by the city to contact San Mateo County Health Services and its Aging and Adult Services on Spencer's behalf?

I suspect the answer to all of these is no.

MV, please help me understand - IF an unscrupulous police officer wanted to do a warrantless search of my home could he simply arrange an anonymous claim that I was inside and endangered and then enter my home? Could he still do so even if someone verified that I was not inside or not endangered?

Thanks.

I am glad to see this issue examined here by the community--These soles need only a little help--not to be pushed over the edge by something that could easily be resolved by the disincentive of having to pay a storage unit bill. Thank you Mr. Stogner for bringing his forward for discussion.
There needs to be a better way. Shame on all of us

Peter, the short answer to your question is "yes." The constitution allows for entry with a warrant and courts have considered "exigent circumstances" as exceptions. These would include imminent danger to life or property, and probable cause to make an arrest. There are no hard and fast rules and different courts in the U.S. have considered the specific circumstances in determining whether the entry was justified. Different regional courts have had different outlooks on this based on the civil liberties views of the judges involved. To answer your question, "Could he still do this even if someone verified that I was not inside or not endangered," I believe I read in the paper that the police report stated the neighbor only stated the person was not inside AFTER the officers had entered. While this could be true, it also makes sense that if an officer did step over the line in making a warrantless entry, many human beings would tend to document it in such a way that does not indicate they made a mistake because of the consequences involved.

I saw Mr. Harris frequently in MP & would speak casually w/him. He was very curious about my dogs & the dog rescue work I am involved in. I thought that with the warmer weather, he just wasn't spending much time at Peet's. NO WONDER we never heard anything about this, even when a PA Online person posted questions on the forum about this suicide.

Hoarding is notoriously difficult to treat & Mr. Harris obviously had serious problems - I don't mean that in a judgemental way, but in a way that since it was obvious to his landlord, how could they not know that forcing a hoarder to suddenly dismantle their belongings is terrifying for them? I know this, & I'm not a hoarder or a mental health expert - I just use the little bit of brain & heart I was given - why couldn't they? I am sure that no one "in charge" anticipated suicide, but it still seems incredibly stupid, insensitive & dangerous.

24 hr. eviction? That seems unnecessarily cruel, even though I understand the reasons why. I truly understand that his hoarding created health & safety issues, espec in an apt., but to not help a senior citizen who was so frightened about the condition of his unit is unconscionable - even if landlord was unaware of his fear. Was it that he initially put on such a good face that all involved authorities though he was fine? But, OTOH, who the heck (besides my former scurrilous, carpetbagging landlord, Page Mill Properties), would turn out a 74 year old man whose hoarding indicated a mental health issue? It does sound like the landlord was helpful in hiring workers to assist, & I know Harris's mental health was the landlord's responsibility, but this seems to have been too fast, too destructive for this gentleman. Of course, if he'd caused injury or destruction of property & other tenants through his hoarding, we'd also all be pointing the finger at the landlord.

I am so very sorry that this was his end. My condolences to his loved ones.

[Post removed. Please discuss the topic, not other posters.]

POGO, that comment has nothing to do w/Mr. Harris's tragic death. Please, let's keep different subjects on their appropriate threads.

Peter:

as Mr. Buckheit noted, there is an exeption for exigent circumstances. Not having read this police report I can't tell you what the particulars are in this case. In my experience, I had several occasions to force entry to check on the welfare of individuals. In one case, a motor home that had been parked for a long period of time was issuing a terrible odor. Smelled like dead body to me and several others. In fact, the smell was so bad we called the fire department for breathing aparatus as we couldn't get close enough without retching from the smell. We forced entry. Turned out to be an overflowing and unpumped sewage holding tank.

I also forced entry when we had a call inquiring as to someone's safety, when we arrived the inside of the windows were covered in flies. Pretty consistent with the possibility of a dead body. Turned out to be the person had moved out and left garbage behind that had spawned a million flies.

One hoarding case I was involved in, social services immediately removed the tenant as the house was a disaster. There were piles of paper and garbage from floor to ceiling. Literally - floor to ceiling. There was decomposing food everywhere. There were "hallways" through the garbage from doorway to doorway. Talk about a fire and health hazard. If a fire had started in this house it would have been well fueled. Not to mention the egregiously unsanitary conditions.

As I said, I don't know the specifics of this case, but if it was anything like the case I witnessed, immediate action was required. Especially given it was in an apartment complex with more than just the "hoarder's" life at risk.

Hoarding is a very sad mental illness.

Actually I may have misspoken above. Here is the conflict between the events as described by his neighbor and the police:

"Knowing that Harris would be upset about people entering his apartment, Huidekoper [neighbor] said she told officers and the apartment manager that he was alive and well, and on vacation. She said she called Harris but officers refused to take the phone from her. Menlo Park police spokeswoman Nicole Acker contested that version of events, reading from a police report that said Huidekoper was the one who refused to give officers the phone."

A 24-hour eviction notice to a hoarder is very, very unusual. I am very sorry that Spencer Harris's story had such a tragic ending.

I've had some personal experience with hoarding. My father, who is in his 80s and owns his own house, has had a serious problem with hoarding for years - to the point where he would let no one inside.

A few years ago, he was out of town when a tree fell on his house. The neighbors called the police. When the police and firemen entered the house, it was immediately deemed a fire and health hazard. My father was ordered to have the clutter removed within three months.

As is the case for most hoarders, for my father, the accumulation of stuff to the point where it was choking him masked a serious, underlying depression.

In the case of Spencer Harris, without his "stuff", it may have been that he couldn't face the feelings of a killer depression he most likely had kept at bay for so long. I suspect that even if they had allowed him to take longer to part with his belongings, he may have eventually committed suicide anyway.

Here's a story about advising landlords on how to deal with hoarding tenants:

Web Link

This is obviously a difficult and tragic story from everyone's perspective, especially the family and friends of Mr. Harris. My condolences to all.

But what if Mr. Harris's hoarding resulted in a fire that claimed the lives and property of other tenants in his building or even in his neighborhood? It would certainly come out that family and friends knew about it and yet no one did anything about it. Would you feel the same way or would you criticize the police and City of Menlo Park for a lack of code of enforcement.

And, as someone noted above, suppose it wasn't hoarding old newspapers, but you had a neighbor hoarding flammable or explosive chemicals. Would that change your mind about having to take immediate action?

This is a classic case of you're damned if you do, you're damned if you don't. While this is all very sad, I prefer not to second guess people - especially law enforcement officials - who have to make "on the spot" decisions to ensure the safety of everyone.

24 hours notice?

Did anyone see the news report on this the other night? I think I am glad it was covered by the news, because it sheds light on an issue that it's easy to be disrespectful & dismissive of. I do think the news reporter could've been a little more sensitive about it. It was also interesting that a hoarder allowed himself to be filmed & interviewed, looking like he was getting some assistance from a psychologist.

I have a neighbor who has a hoarding problem. She got it under control a few times, temporarily, & it grew worse when both her parents died. She holds down a very responsible, respectable job, has healthy pets & is still young enough to get a handle on it. Learning what I have about this in the last year, I may see if I can gently revisit the issue w/her to see where she's at with it. She definitely had some depression & physically-related complaints going on that have really improved. One thing is definite - it truly pushes people away & it's been hard to maintain a deeper friendship w/her.