Berow and her husband lived in a hotel, and went on a vacation to California. Before leaving, they asked the manager to watch their room and "arrest any intruders." While they were gone, the manager found the door had been tampered with and thought he saw someone inside. He called the cops. Even though the door had been tampered with, it was apparently still secured from inside by a chain lock. Believing that a burglary was in progress, the officer forced entry.
No one was found inside, but while searching only in areas where a person could hide the officer found a hash pipe and some marijuana plants. He left the apartment, got a search warrant, returned and seized the evidence. The trial court suppressed the evidence and the people appealed.
The Colorado Supreme Court held that the apparent in-progress burglary constituted exigent circumstances justifying the officer's entry, and that additionally the hotel manager had apparently been given authority to consent to the officer's entry. Once inside, the officer found the items in plain view and did not deviate from the original purpose of the search until he had obtained a warrant. The order suppressing the evidence was reversed.