Focus (Forum & Focus)
Nov. 20, 2008
Door-to-Door Justice
The government has made many attempts to expand the landmark 'Hudson’s’ ruling to constitutional violations other than those involving the 'knock and announce’ rule, writes Laurie L. Levenson. - Focus Column
FOCUS COLUMN
By Laurie L. Levenson In 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the landmark case of Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586 (2006). In Hudson, the court held that even though there had been a constitutional violation of Hudson's Fourth Amendment right to knock and announce before the police executed a warrant at his home, that violation did not warrant application of the exclusionary rule. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for a ...For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In