Category Archives: Knock and announce

AR: Knock-and-announce applies to parole searches, but Hudson adopted and exclusionary rule doesn’t apply

The knock-and-announce rule applies to parole searches, and violation of the rule is a substantial violation of the Fourth Amendment and the state constitution. The court adopts Hudson, however, and finds that the exclusionary rule should not be applied. Lane … Continue reading

Posted in Attenuation, Exclusionary rule, Knock and announce, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off

Cal.4th: Failure to knock-and-announce and wait long enough was not subject to exclusionary rule

The officers’ failure to knock-and-announce (really wait long enough) before entry does not invoke the exclusionary rule under Michigan v. Hudson. People v. Byers, 2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 1087 (4th Dist. Dec. 14, 2016):

Posted in Knock and announce | Comments Off

AR: While SW must be issued on affidavit or recorded testimony, questions about no-knock didn’t have to be recorded, especially when no-knock refused

Search warrants must be issued on affidavits or recorded testimony. The issuing judge asked questions about the no-knock entry, and this was separate from probable cause finding. This did not have to be recorded. Besides, the judge denied the no-knock … Continue reading

Posted in Knock and announce, Reasonable suspicion, Warrant requirement | Comments Off

D.Conn.: Violation of knock-and-announce on a 6 am arrest warrant execution leads to suppression despite Hudson

The defendant’s house was entered at 6 am with an arrest warrant, and the officers knocked and entered when there was no prompt answer. The court credits the testimony of the occupants and the time involved and not the officer … Continue reading

Posted in Knock and announce | Comments Off

OH7 follows Hudson; failure to knock-and-announce doesn’t warrant suppression

A failure to properly knock-and-announce an entry does not warrant suppression, following Hudson v. Michigan. State v. Bembry, 2015-Ohio-5598, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 5397 (7th Dist. December 30, 2015). [Yes, just now on Lexis.] The motion to suppress is denied … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Knock and announce | Comments Off

CA9: A “dilapidated” shack behind a house on the curtilage was still a place subject to the Fourth Amendment

A “dilapidated” shack behind a house on the curtilage was still a place subject to the Fourth Amendment, but the entry without a warrant claim goes forward. They get qualified immunity on the knock-and-announce violation. Deputies entered and shot a … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Curtilage, Knock and announce | Comments Off

NE: Failure to announce entry to execute a misd warrant on ptf’s grandson survived summary judgment; interests rule serves are important

The trial court erred in granting summary judgment for officers who entered plaintiff’s home to arrest her grandson without announcing and with force. A question of fact is presented on the failure to announce, and it serves important interests. The … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Knock and announce | Comments Off

PA: Knock-and-announce rule in PA exists by court rule, and it serves important interests; the remedy for violation is suppression of evidence; Hudson not followed

The knock-and-announce rule in Pennsylvania exists by court rule, and it serves important interests. The remedy for violation is suppression of evidence. Pennsylvania does not follow Hudson v. Michigan. Commonwealth v. Frederick, 2015 PA Super 206, 2015 Pa. Super. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in Exclusionary rule, Knock and announce | Comments Off

S.D.Ala.: No-knock warrant was permissible here because of the expected presence of firearms and defendant used surveillance cameras

A no-knock warrant was permissible here because of the expected presence of firearms and defendant used surveillance cameras on the property. United States v. Miller, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93857 (S.D.Ala. July 20, 2015): Miller also argues the affidavit did … Continue reading

Posted in Knock and announce | Comments Off

MA: While PC for a no-knock warrant wasn’t shown, GFE otherwise applies to no-knock

The affidavit for the search warrant included a no-knock request, but the fact that powder cocaine was sought wasn’t shown to be enough to justify a no-knock. Probable cause of a likelihood of destruction is required under Massachusetts law. Defendant … Continue reading

Posted in Good faith exception, Knock and announce | Comments Off