knock and announce rule

• The demise of the knock-and-announce rule: Hudson v. Michigan.

INTRODUCTION In Hudson v. Michigan, the Supreme Court held that the exclusionary rule does not necessarily apply to evidence seized pursuant to a se...

• Jones Law Review
• Vol. 11 Nbr. 1, September 2006

• 'Knock and Announce' Rule Applies to Arrest Warrants

A U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning violations of the "knock and announce" rule with respect to search warrants applies to the execution of arrest warrants as well, the 1st Circuit has ruled. An arrest warrant was issued for the defendant because of multiple parole violations. The police found him at a hotel in a room registered under another name. They knocked loudly four to five times in rapid succession, waited 10 to 15 seconds and used a passkey to enter the room, where drug paraphernalia was in plain view.

• Lawyers USA
• February 03, 2007

• State v. Acord, (Ohio 2009)

Motion to suppress; probable cause; knock and announce; exclusionary rule.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Technical knockout: Hudson v. Michigan and the unfortunate demise of the knock-and-announce rule.

While the machinery of law enforcement ... ha[s] changed dramatically since the Fourth Amendment became part of the Nation's fundamental law in 1791, ...

• American Criminal Law Review
• Vol. 44 Nbr. 3, June 2007

• Constitutional law--the 'knock and announce' rule becomes obsolete--Hudson v. Michigan, 126 S. Ct. 2159 (2006).

The Fourth Amendment prohibits law enforcement officers from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures of private citizens and their homes. (1) Fo...

• Suffolk Journal of Trial & Appellate Advocacy
• Nbr. 12, January 2007

• Evidence Allowed in No-Knock Raid ; Court Says Rule Not a Protection

Evidence seized by police officers who have a warrant but fail to follow the "knock and announce" rule before entering a suspect's home is still admissible in court, a divided 5-4 Supreme Court ruled yesterday. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, said a long- established knock-and-announce rule never was intended to protect a person's right to prevent the government "from seeing or taking evidence described in a warrant.

• The Washington Times
• June 19, 2006

• State v. Gipson, (Ohio 2009)

Defendant's trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a motion to suppress a search of the defendant's home pursuant to a search warrant that was issued based upon probable cause. Affidavit supporting search warrant for suspected methamphetamine lab was sufficient for determination of probable cause to believe methamphetamine was being manufactured in the defendant's home when independent investigation of confidential informant's statements corroborated informant's information. Sanction for violation of "knock-and-announce" rule such as the application of the exclusionary rule is not automatic and must be weighed against the cost to the public.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• State v. Gilbert, (Ohio 2007)

CRIMINAL - Trial court did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress evidence based on allegation that affidavit in support of warrant failed to provide a substantial basis for the issuing judge to conclude that probable cause existed. Further, in this case exclusionary rule was not proper remedy for violation of the knock and announce rule.

• Ohio Supreme Court

• Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U. S. (2006)

... in violation of the Fourth Amend- ment's "knock-and-announce" rule. The trial court granted Hudson...

• U.S. Supreme Court

• State v. Nunez, (Ohio 2008)

Substantial basis to conclude the existence of probable cause for issuance of a search warrant was lacking. There was competent credible evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that the search came within the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule. The waiver, under R.C. 2935.12, of knock and announce requirements for the search was invalid. Trial court did not err in failing to exclude evidence of the search under the exclusionary rule, due to the violation of knock and announce rule.

• Ohio Supreme Court