Reply #48: This reverses a 1976 Supreme Court precedent

[benEzra]

that stated that no-knocks could ONLY be used in certain circumstances, on Fourth Amendment grounds.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/1997/may976.htm

Knock and Anounce Legislation

Despite this common law background, 34 states, the District of Columbia, and the federal government have enacted statutes requiring that law enforcement officers knock and announce their presence prior to making forced entry to premises.4 A typical example of a statutory enactment is the federal knock and announce statute, which provides: The officer may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house, or any part of a house, or anything therein, to execute a search warrant, if, after notice of his authority and purpose, he is refused admittance or when necessary to liberate himself or a person aiding him in the execution of the warrant.5

Some jurisdictions enacted legislation providing for so-called no-knock warrants. However, controversy precipitated by no-knock warrants resulted in Congress' repealing the federal no-knock statute in 1974. Only a few states currently have statutes authorizing no-knock warrants.

(snip)


UNDERLYING RATIONALE FOR KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE

The Supreme Court has determined that "every householder, the good and the bad, the guilty and the innocent, is entitled to the protection designed to secure the common interest against unlawful invasion of the house."19 The knock and announce rule provides citizens with psychological security, knowing that one need not fear an unexpected intrusion. Privacy interests also are protected, avoiding unnecessary embarrassment, shock, or property damage resulting from an unannounced entry.

The rule serves to protect both the individual citizen and the police from the risk of harm and the potential for violence that may occur as a result of an unannounced entry.20 Announcement protects officers by ensuring that they are not "mistaken for prowlers and shot down by a fearful householder."21 Innocent citizens also are protected from law enforcement officers who mistakenly might shoot armed occupants who merely are trying to defend themselves from who they preceive to be armed intruders.