Booker T. Hudson, JR. v. Michigan (547 U.S. 586)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 15, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 547 U.S. 586 · 126 S. Ct. 2159
- Decided
- June 15, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Scalia
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV. We decide whether violation of the “knock-and-announce” rule requires the suppression of all evidence found in the search. I Police obtained a warrant authorizing a search for drugs and firearms at the home of petitioner Booker Hudson. They discovered both. Large quantities of drugs were found, including cocaine rocks in Hudson’s pocket. A loaded gun was lodged between the cushion and armrest of the chair in which he was sitting. Hudson was charged under Michigan law with unlawful drug and firearm possession. This case is before us only because of the method of entry into the house. When the police arrived to execute the warrant, they announced their presence, but waited only a short time — perhaps “three to five seconds,” App. 15 — before turning the knob of the unlocked front door and entering Hudson’s home. Hudson moved to suppress all the inculpatory evidence, arguing that the premature entry violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The Michigan trial court granted his motion. On interlocutory review, the Michigan Court of Appeals reversed, relying on Michigan Supreme Court cases holding that suppression is inappropriate when entry is made pursuant to warrant but without proper “ ‘knock and announce.’ ” App. to Pet. for Cert. 4 (citing People v. Vasquez, 461 Mich. 235, 602 N. W. 2d 376 (1999) (per…
Excerpt of a 29,031-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.