SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY The Fourth Amendment and ...

of the crime.” (Richards v. Wisconsin, supra, at p. 394
[137 L.Ed.2 nd at p. 624.)
The fact that property might be damaged or destroyed
during the entry does not require a higher degree of
exigency in order to justify the no-knock authorization.
(United States v. Ramirez (1998) 523 U.S. 65 [140
L.Ed.2 nd 191; United States v. Banks, supra, at p. 37 [157
L.Ed.2 nd at p. 355]; United States v. Bynum (9 th Cir. 2004)
362 F.3 rd 574, 580.)
Note: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal talks in terms of a
“no-knock warrant” in a case where the officers had the
door slammed in their face at the front porch. (United
States v. Peterson (9 th Cir. 2003) 353 F.3 rd 1045.)
Peterson, however, is more of an “exigent
circumstance” situation, which developed at the
front door, and did not involve an attempt to get a
“no-knock” authorization from the magistrate prior
to the actual execution of the warrant.
Entry by Ruse: One way to avoid the problems inherent in
complying with the knock and notice statutes is to use a ruse to
gain entry. As long as the officer has probable cause justifying an
entry beforehand, the use of a ruse is lawful. (People v. Reeves
(1964) 61 Cal.2 nd 268, 273.)
However, the entry must be supported by “probable cause”
to be legal. Absent probable cause (and, absent exigent
circumstances, a search warrant), it is illegal to use a ruse
to make entry, or even to trick the suspect into opening his
door, such a trick constituting a violation of the defendant’s
right to privacy. (People v. Hudson (1964) 225
Cal.App.2 nd 554; People v. Miller (1967) 248 Cal.App.2 nd
731; United States v. Bosse (9 th Cir. 1990) 898 F.2 nd 113.)
It is equally illegal to trick a suspect out of his
home, unless such the ruse is supported by probable
cause to believe the suspect is engaged in illegal
activity. (People v. Reyes (2000) 83 Cal.App.4 th 7.)
Also, officers must remember that either a warrant, or
probable cause and exigent circumstances, will likely be
required under the rule of People v. Ramey (1976) 16
© 2012 Robert C. Phillips. All rights reserved
382