Illinois v. McArthur

The Court found that the warrantless seizure was reasonable since it involved exigent circumstances. The restraint employed by the officers was adapted to the circumstances, avoiding significant intrusion into the home itself. The Court balanced the privacy-related and law enforcement-related concerns. The officers had probable cause to believe the defendant’s home contained evidence, and had valid reason to fear that, unless restrained, the defendant would destroy it before other officers could return with a warrant. The officers made reasonable efforts to reconcile their needs with the demands of personal privacy, and imposed the restraint for a limited period, two hours. Given the nature of the intrusion and the law enforcement interest at stake, the brief seizure of the premises was permissible.