In the case of the Stevens homicide, the author believes several small procedural differences could have been conducted by the police which would have insured the admissibility of evidence and prevented any civil liability. As outlined in the preceding paragraphs, the authority of the police to enter and secure the scene of an emergency is protected by case law. The issue in this case, just as in Mincey, is that once the emergency or exigent circumstance is contained law enforcement must then obtain a warrant to continue the search. In both of these cases the officers continued a further, intrusive, search still acting under the emergency exception to the warrant requirement. At the point when there becomes no further threat of injury or destruction of evidence, the officers in this case should have stopped the search until a search warrant was granted by a judge. Upon a search warrant being obtained the admissibility of all evidence subsequently collected would be ensured. This would have also protected the officers against any civil liability they were subject to as a result of an illegal warrantless…