{"id":43822,"date":"2020-05-20T09:47:04","date_gmt":"2020-05-20T14:47:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=43822"},"modified":"2020-05-20T09:47:04","modified_gmt":"2020-05-20T14:47:04","slug":"ar-state-constl-requirement-of-right-to-refuse-consent-on-knock-and-talk-reaffirmed-suppression-hearing-stipulation-cant-be-used-at-trial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=43822","title":{"rendered":"AR: State const&#8217;l requirement of right to refuse consent on knock-and-talk reaffirmed; suppression hearing stipulation can&#8217;t be used at trial"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>The police violated a longstanding state constitutional prohibition of a knock-and-talk seeking consent to enter a home without a warning of a right to refuse. In addition, a factual stipulation for the suppression hearing couldn\u2019t be used by the state at trial over objection under Simmons, a 51 year old rule at the time of the trial. <a href=\"https:\/\/opinions.arcourts.gov\/ark\/courtofappeals\/en\/471713\/1\/document.do\">Virgil v. State<\/a>, 2020 Ark. App. 314 (May 20, 2020):<\/p>\n\n\n\n<!--more-->\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\"><p>Does this court treat one of Arkansans\u2019 state constitutional rights as seriously as the Arkansas Supreme Court has for the past fifteen plus years? It does, as it must, and today we remind all who are interested that Arkansans\u2019 right to be free from an unreasonable search of their homes is alive, well, and robust. Specifically, we reaffirm the bright-line rule that law enforcement must inform citizens of their right to refuse a warrantless search of their homes before an officer may enter, not after the warrantless entry has already occurred, as happened in this case. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The police violated a longstanding state constitutional prohibition of a knock-and-talk seeking consent to enter a home without a warning of a right to refuse. In addition, a factual stipulation for the suppression hearing couldn\u2019t be used by the state &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=43822\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-43822","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43822","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=43822"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43822\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43823,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43822\/revisions\/43823"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=43822"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=43822"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=43822"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}