Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

W.D.Okla. accepts gov't argument that a failed knock-and-talk could lead to exigent circumstances from noise of destruction of evidence

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

A failed knock-and-talk at a motel room led to noise inside that the officers suspected the occupants were destroying drug evidence. The court rejected the defense contention that this was a police created exigency because there were no destruction of evidence prior to the knock on the door. United States v. Hendrix, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73523 (W.D. Okla. August 19, 2009): In contrast, the evidence in this case supports the officers' claim that, after they identified themselves, they heard movement and toilet flushing and that, based on their experience, such activity signals the destruction of evidence. This activity further corroborated the information provided by the informant and reasonably presented a situation in which there was not sufficient time to obtain a search warrant...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on August 22, 2009 (boomark / email).