Jeffrey Johnson is a legal writer with a focus on personal injury. He has worked on personal injury and sovereign immunity litigation in addition to experience in family, estate, and criminal law. He earned a J.D. from the University of Baltimore and has worked in legal offices and non-profits in Maryland, Texas, and North Carolina. He has also earned an MFA in screenwriting from Chapman Univer...

Full Bio →

Written by

UPDATED: Feb 6, 2012

Advertiser Disclosure

It’s all about you. We want to help you make the right legal decisions.

We strive to help you make confident insurance and legal decisions. Finding trusted and reliable insurance quotes and legal advice should be easy. This doesn’t influence our content. Our opinions are our own.

Editorial Guidelines: We are a free online resource for anyone interested in learning more about legal topics and insurance. Our goal is to be an objective, third-party resource for everything legal and insurance related. We update our site regularly, and all content is reviewed by experts.

Whether the police can enter a home without knocking and announcing themselves depends on the circumstances. Many states have laws that require law enforcement officers to “knock and announce.” The knock and announce rule requires law enforcement officers with a warrant who are investigating a crime to knock and announce their purpose and identity, and wait a reasonable amount of time before entering an area. This rule was originally put in place to guard against the privacy rights of the individuals subject to the search warrant, as well as to limit property damage. 

Exigent Circumstance Exception to Knock and Announce Requirement

Most states allow the police to either ignore the “waiting” requirement of the knock and announce rule, or ignore the rule all together if exigent circumstances exist at the scene of the search warrant. Exigent circumstances are exceptions to the knock and announce rule. Exigent circumstances mean there is some type of emergency requiring the police to enter right away without delay, such as when the officers’ safety is at risk, or the police believe that the suspects are destroying evidence.   

For example, suppose the police obtain a search warrant for a house which they believe contains a meth lab. Now suppose they arrive at a house with the search warrant, and as they are approaching the door, they hear people scrambling around inside the house. This could lead the police to believe that the people inside have been notified of their presence, and are destroying evidence of the meth lab inside. Under these exigent circumstances, the police may force their way into the home to keep the suspects from destroying the evidence. However, whether or not exigent circumstances actually existed when the police barged through the door without knocking will ultimately be up to the court to decide. Police may also obtain a “no-knock” warrant if they can show that warning occupants when they arrive to execute the warrant would put them or others in great danger. 

Get Legal Help Today

Find the right lawyer for your legal issue.

 Secured with SHA-256 Encryption

Consequences of Knock and Announce Rule Violations

When the police violate the knock and announce rule by barging into an individual’s home without notice, the individuals against which the search warrant was enforced may or may not have a remedy, depending on the state and the circumstances of the violation. When courts are faced with violations of the knock and announce rule, they typically examine the circumstances to determine whether exigent circumstances existed to allow the police to ignore the rule. 

If a court determines that the police have indeed violated the knock and announce rule, the individuals may be able to get compensation through a lawsuit against the police for property damage. Police who violate the knock and announce rule may also be subject to administrative penalties. However, in most states and in all federal courts, evidence found as a result of a violation of the knock and announce rule will usually be allowed in at trial. 

For example, let’s take our meth lab situation again. Suppose after the police hear the scrambling around in the home, the police force their way in by breaking a sliding glass door. The police then learn that the “scrambling around” that they heard was actually two dogs playing by the door, and the residents of the home were instead sleeping in another room. However, the police see the meth lab equipment, and quickly seize the evidence and arrest the individuals sleeping in their bed. The police in this case failed to knock and announce their presence, and no exigent circumstances existed to allow them to break through the individual’s door. However, even if the judge determines that the police violated the knock and announce rule in this situation, the meth lab equipment will most likely be allowed in as evidence against the individuals at trial. On the other hand, some states do allow evidence to be suppressed when the knock and announce rule is violated. In these rare cases, the violation must be egregious to keep evidence from being used in trial against a suspect.