Chief's Counsel: Violation of Knock-and-Announce Rule Does Not Require Suppression of All Evidence Found in Search

Chief's Counsel

Police Chief Magazine|Columns|Chief's Counsel|Chief’s Counsel: Violation of Knock-and-Announce Rule Does Not Require Suppression of All Evidence Found in Search

Chief’s Counsel: Violation of Knock-and-Announce Rule Does Not Require Suppression of All Evidence Found in Search

Tom Van Dorn, Sergeant and Legal Advisor, Phoenix Police Department

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June ruling in Hudson v. Michigan makes changes that have some arguing whether this decision will under-mine the exclusionary rule’s deterrent effect on police misconduct.¹

Facts of the Case
The police obtained a search warrant authorizing a search for drugs and firearms at the home of Booker Hudson. They seized drugs and a loaded gun that was found between the cushion and the armrest of a chair. Hudson subsequently was charged under Michigan law with unlawful possession of drugs and firearms.