San Francisco Skyline
BILL OF RIGHTS-- First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.-- Second Amendment -A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed-- Third Amendment - No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law-- Fourth 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.-- Fifth Amendment - No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.--Sixth Amendment - In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.-- Seventh Amendment - In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law-- Eighth Amendment - Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted-- Ninth Amendment - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people--Tenth Amendment - The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people--.
Taking the Fifth-A Criminal Law Blog
RSS icon Email icon Bullet (black)
  • IS KNOCK-NOTICE STILL RELEVANT?

    Posted on May 21st, 2009 zshapiro No comments

    The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of Gary Roberge for attempted manufacturing methamphetamine, possession of a gun in connection with narcotics and possession of materials necessary for the production of methamphetamine.

    Roberge was arrested after his then 16 year old daughter told the people that she babysat for that her father manufactured meth. They told a reserve police officer who employed them. Cleveland, Tennessee police Lieutenant Brumley then interviewed Roberge’s daughter and then got a search warrant for his house.

    The affidavit supporting the search warrant requested permission to enter the residence without give knock notice. In support of the request Brumley wrote that Roberge owned guns, that he had previously been taken to a mental hospital, and that he had a bad temper. The court found that this was sufficient to find the exigent circumstance necessary to give permission for the police to enter Roberge’s residence without knocking on the door, giving notice of their presence and their purpose prior to entering the residence.

    The police then went to Roberge’s residence, entered it without giving knock-notice, found him asleep in his bed with a gun nearby, and seized methamphetamine related equipment.

    The trial court found that probably cause is not necessary to avoid giving the Fourth Amendment’s knock notice requirement prior to entry. A reasonable suspicion that knock notice would be dangerous, futile or interfere with the investigation is all that is needed. But the police officers must have an objective and particularized reason for their suspicion.

    Whether or not the no-knock order was appropriate the Sixth Circuit, citing the US Supreme Court’s decision in Hudson v. Michigan, declared that failure to comply with the knock-notice requirement does not mandate suppression of the evidence.

    Without excluding the evidence as a remedy for entering a residence; without giving knock-notice; does the knock-notice rule have any relevance. Why should police give notice if there is no penalty for the failure to give notice. True in this case, Roberge was sleeping. But if he was awake in his livingroom and heard the police entering, he could have shot shot the police. Apparently the chance of this happening is immaterial to the police because, knowing that Roberge had a gun, they still entered the residence.

    Roberge was sentenced to 295 months in prison. Does anyone outside of Tennessee believe that a man should get nearly 25 years in prison for manufacturing methamphetamine for his own use, considering that while he had guns, he did not use them? Sentencing Roberge to 295 month cannot be considered a victory for the War On Drugs. Nor will it decrease the amount of drugs in circulation. But it will cost the government a lot of taxpayer dollars.

    Leave a Reply