SC: Knock and talk requires reasonable suspicion under state law

A knock and talk is a legitimate law enforcement technique implicitly recognized in Jardines. (“We have accordingly recognized that ‘the knocker on the front door is treated as an invitation or license to attempt an entry, justifying ingress to the home by solicitors, hawkers and peddlers of all kinds. … Thus, a police officer not armed with a warrant may approach a home and knock, precisely because that is ‘no more than any private citizen might do.’”) Nevertheless, to recognize a higher privacy interest in the home, as a matter of state statutory and constitutional law, knock and talk requires reasonable suspicion to come to the door. State v. Counts, 2015 S.C. LEXIS 244 (July 8, 2015):

Yet, rather than enunciating an unyielding rule or eliminating the “knock and talk” technique in its entirety, we hold that law enforcement must have reasonable suspicion of illegal activity at a targeted residence prior to approaching the residence and knocking on the door. As with our previous right-to-privacy decisions, we find this rule safeguards the express constitutional right against unreasonable invasions of privacy and does not hamper law enforcement in their investigative efforts.

Furthermore, we believe this decision does not exceed the bounds of our judicial authority as conferred by the drafters of the right-to-privacy provision. In fact, our ruling effectuates the intent of the Legislature to afford heightened protection against intrusions into a citizen’s home. As evidenced by the enactment of the “Protection of Persons and Property Act,” the Legislature has recognized the sanctity of one’s home and sought to ensure a citizen’s right to protect it. S.C. Code Ann. §§ 16-11-410 to -450 (Supp. 2014). Our ruling acknowledges this legislative pronouncement and gives greater protection to South Carolina citizens than that of the federal constitution.