7th Cir.: Government gambled and lost on knock and talk and there was no probable cause or exigent circumstances for their entry

Government’s failed knock and talk did not create probable cause and exigent circumstances nor did the occupants’ consent to an entry. The government could not claim on this record that exigent circumstances arose from the knock and talk. [This case is a fascinating analysis of reasonable suspicion never rising to probable cause and a government “gamble” that the knock and talk would work.] United States v. Ellis, 499 F.3d 686 (7th Cir. 2007):

We note that our conclusion relies on the fact that there is a minimum of information presented by the government about the 40th Street home on the probable cause issue. There was no effort by the government to develop additional evidence of criminal activity in the home before they decided to perform a knock and talk investigation. It was the government’s decision to inform the occupants of the 40th Street home that they were targets of a government investigation when the government knocked on the front door and asked for consent to come into the home. The government took a gamble hoping that the occupants would consent to their entry or would open the door revealing contraband in plain sight. Perhaps if the government had come up with a better story than, “We’re looking for a lost child, can we search the home?” they might have been able to convince Ellis to consent to their entry. However, once Ellis refused to consent, the occupants knew of the government’s investigation of the home and so the government was concerned that the occupants might destroy any drugs that could be in the home. However, it was the government’s choice to reveal itself to the home occupants by engaging in a “knock and talk” investigation and its decision backfired. It is perfectly lawful for the government to knock on the front door of home and ask to come in. However, once Ellis said no, the government could not save its case by kicking in the side door when it lacked either a warrant or probable cause coupled with exigent circumstances. We return the case to the district court to consider in the first instance whether there are any additional arguments to save the government’s search of the 40th Street home and with it the government’s case against Ellis.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.