In People v. Ikeda, the Supreme Court was poised to address these questions: (1) After detaining a person outside a hotel room, may law enforcement officers enter the detainee’s room to conduct a protective sweep under Maryland v. Buie (1990) 494 U.S. 325 based on a reasonable suspicion the room harbors a person posing a danger to officer safety? (2) Did law enforcement officers have reasonable suspicion in this case to believe defendant’s hotel room harbored a person who posed a danger to officer safety?
After the court scheduled argument in the case for the early-May calendar, however, the Attorney General told the court that the defendant had died and then moved to abate the appeal. (See People v. St. Maurice (1913) 166 Cal. 201, 202 [defendant’s death pending appeal causes “all proceedings in the matter [to] incurably abate”.) The court granted the motion and canceled oral argument.
The court wasn’t required to dump the appeal. It could have still resolved the issues raised in the case. (See In re Sheena K. (2007) 40 Cal.4th 875, 879 [exercising court’s “inherent authority” to decide a “technically moot” appeal after defendant’s death].) In fact, the Ikeda defense counsel opposed the motion to abate. As with settlements before decision, a criminal defendant’s death might or might not prevent a Supreme Court opinion.