Supreme Court Warrant Decision, no more knocking

So lets see how the different views stack up on this one.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/06/15/scotus.search/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) – A split Supreme Court ruled Thursday that drug evidence seized in a home search can be used against a suspect even though police failed to knock on the door and wait a “reasonable” amount of time before entering.

So they still have to get a warrant, but when they get to your house with that warrant they can just kick down the door and yell, “Police, warrant!”.

I have no problem with this, in fact, I think the idea that they had to knock and wait was stupid. Nothing like saying to a criminal, “Hey, it’s the police, get your guns, take cover, and shoot us when we open the door”. If you’ve done enough for the police to get the warrant in the first place, I don’t think they should be required to knock.

there used to be a “no knock” and a “knock” warrant…

the only way to get a no knock was if someone was in harm of death so on and so fourth…

i fully support this

down with the criminals!

My boss left early today, my project wrapped up early, so I have a little more time to read today than normal. First off, since I know someone is going to say “there goes the damn conservatives shreading the Constitution again”, here is the actual text of the 4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

There is nothing there about knock vs no knock, so any laws up to this point were simple interpretation.

And yes, several states passed laws allowing no-knock warrants, but most were repealed because of court challenges. There are exclusions to the existing knock requirement.