No Knock Decision, Ind. S.Ct., 5/10/11

[Kirk Freeman]

May 10, 2011 the Indiana Supreme Court handed down Lacey v. State dealing with no knock warrants. As there has been some interest in this topic, the decision is available here:

http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/05101101bd.pdf

 

[steveh_131]

Wow, this stuff is pretty dense.

So basically, the defendants wanted the evidence from the search tossed out because there was no knock and announcement before the search. The court denied their motion, and this is an appeal decision affirming that denial?

 

[grimor]

I hope I'm never the "victim" of a no knock warrant as I will most likely be shot for shooting whoever breaks down my door.

 

[INGunGuy]

I hope I'm never the "victim" of a no knock warrant as I will most likely be shot for shooting whoever breaks down my door.

I have said that numerous times, I am not a criminal, I dont have criminals living in my home, I dont associate with criminals. So, if someone is breaking thru my front door, they are going to come up against my pump action 12 and my Ar-15 after the 12 is empty. If it happens to be cops breaking down my door, they decided to end their life by breaking into the wrong house. Personally I could care less. No-knock warrants should be outlawed as they have killed more innocent people than getting bad guys....

INGunGuy

 

[jdhaines]

So what does it say. IANL but it sounds like they sided with the previous courts that there was probably cause...OK. Then they discuss how exigent circumstances may be determined and/or used. Then they affirm that since no-knocks have been used before and has good case record to back it up they will agree that it's ok given exigent circumstances. Then they side against the defendant.

So they decided on the idea rather than the actual circumstances in the case? Holding that the previous courts correctly evaluated the evidence and that their conclusions were ok? I'm confused. How do you screw this up...

Indiana Code § 35-33-5-7(d), which provides:
A law enforcement officer may break open any outer or inner door or window in order to execute a search warrant, if he is not admitted following an announcement of his authority and purpose.

 

[Keyser Soze]

No knocks are a last resort. There are situations when they have been misused. Overall I support them. When defense attorneys and John Doe's knock on a persons door and announce themselves, and that person has intentions to kill John Doe's and attorneys if they still feel the same way about no knocks I will change my opinion.

Good intelligence and patience make it possible to avoid no knocks. WAIT for the person to leave and capture them outside of their element. The only no knock I have been on the suspect had a target silhouette tapped to the back of his front door. We entered when he was sleeping. What do you supposed would have happened if we knocked?

 

[RichardR]

I'm all for the good guys catching the bad guys, but the practice of no-knocks makes me nervous as heck.

Because it sort of blurs that line ya know?

 

[jeremy]

Good intelligence and patience make it possible to avoid no knocks. WAIT for the person to leave and capture them outside of their element. The only no knock I have been on the suspect had a target silhouette tapped to the back of his front door. We entered when he was sleeping. What do you supposed would have happened if we knocked?

We will never know what COULD have been...
Only that a Constitutional Right has been Broken...

 

[jedi]

I can't find the court case but it was posted in here (INGO) where the Indiana SC ruled that if you shoot a LEO during a no-knock while on your property it is OK as in the castle doctorie is in effect since you don't expect a no-kock and have nothing illegal at home and/or not wanted by the law.

In the case the no-knock was done on the wrong house and the homeowner did not know who was breaking into his home and he shoot the LEOs that came in. I can't recall but I think he was charged with attempted murder of an LEO but the IN SC ruled agaisnt the prosecurtion.

Anyone have the link for what I'm talking about. It was a big post here a while back early this year I think.

 

[grimor]

I can't find the court case but it was posted in here (INGO) where the Indiana SC ruled that if you shoot a LEO during a no-knock while on your property it is OK as in the castle doctorie is in effect since you don't expect a no-kock and have nothing illegal at home and/or not wanted by the law.

In the case the no-knock was done on the wrong house and the homeowner did not know who was breaking into his home and he shoot the LEOs that came in. I can't recall but I think he was charged with attempted murder of an LEO but the IN SC ruled agaisnt the prosecurtion.

Anyone have the link for what I'm talking about. It was a big post here a while back early this year I think.

My fear isn't beating it in court, as much as it is getting shot during.

 

[Keyser Soze]

We will never know what COULD have been...
Only that a Constitutional Right has been Broken...

It was? You were the victim of a no knock warrant and were erroneously
arrested? Please discuss? I demonstrated a personal experience in which a no knock was necessary. Sorry if your rights could one day potentially be violated.

 

[45fan]

I'm all for the good guys catching the bad guys, but the practice of no-knocks makes me nervous as heck.

Because it sort of blurs that line ya know?

Im with Richard here, I dont mind the police doing everything that they can to catch a criminal, but No-knock entry would open the door for all sorts of bad things to happen.

Mistakes happen, and in that instance, it is very likely that it would be deadly.

 

[RichardR]

I demonstrated a personal experience in which a no knock was necessary.

“Necessity hath no law. Feigned necessities, imaginary necessities, are the greatest cozenage men can put upon the Providence of God, and make pretences to break known rules by.” - Cromwell.

 

[Rob377]

I can't find the court case but it was posted in here (INGO) where the Indiana SC ruled that if you shoot a LEO during a no-knock while on your property it is OK as in the castle doctorie is in effect since you don't expect a no-kock and have nothing illegal at home and/or not wanted by the law.

In the case the no-knock was done on the wrong house and the homeowner did not know who was breaking into his home and he shoot the LEOs that came in. I can't recall but I think he was charged with attempted murder of an LEO but the IN SC ruled agaisnt the prosecurtion.

Anyone have the link for what I'm talking about. It was a big post here a while back early this year I think.

Did a quick search in LEXIS and found nothing in IN on that.

He lived to be prosecuted? That's surprising.
I think the reason this hasn't been litigated very often is the homeowner ends up dead with drugs planted all over the house.

I don't care how good you are, you aren't going to win in a firefight against a SWAT team or a dozen pissed off cops once the shooting starts.

 

[public servant]

If it happens to be cops breaking down my door, they decided to end their life by breaking into the wrong house. Personally I could(n't) care less.

Just for clarification...if you know it's the police...are you going to kill them anyway?

 

[jsgolfman]

No knocks are a last resort. There are situations when they have been misused. Overall I support them. When defense attorneys and John Doe's knock on a persons door and announce themselves, and that person has intentions to kill John Doe's and attorneys if they still feel the same way about no knocks I will change my opinion.

Good intelligence and patience make it possible to avoid no knocks. WAIT for the person to leave and capture them outside of their element. The only no knock I have been on the suspect had a target silhouette tapped to the back of his front door. We entered when he was sleeping. What do you supposed would have happened if we knocked?

I thought you just said:
"Good intelligence and patience make it possible to avoid no knocks. WAIT for the person to leave and capture them outside of their element."

Then to Jeremy:
"I demonstrated a personal experience in which a no knock was necessary. Sorry if your rights could one day potentially be violated."

Which is it? What side of the fence are you on?

 

[steveh_131]

Just for clarification...if you know it's the police...you're going to kill them anyway?

I'm hoping he more meant that there's no way of knowing, in the midst of a firefight, if they are legitimate cops on a legitimate mission. So his conscience would be clear.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Just for clarification...if you know it's the police...you're going to kill them anyway?

well if they are breaking the law and he is in danger of being killed by them I certainly believe he has the right to defend himself. I wouldnt let a street thug point a gun at me and live if I could help it, so why allow anyone else to do it if your not breaking the law? wrong is wrong. The badge isnt a white flag. my house is like a little sovereign nation. If someone comes through the door uninvited trying to kill me, I think im gonna have flashes of blue helmets.

once again we have a court telling us how we can protect our lives. i dont give a **** what a court thinks about what I can do to defend my life from anyone. I was born with the right to live. none of mans laws affect that. i hope it never happens, but no knocks are wrong wrong wrong! and STUPID!!!!!

 

[awatarius]

Did a quick search in LEXIS and found nothing in IN on that.

He lived to be prosecuted? That's surprising.
I think the reason this hasn't been litigated very often is the homeowner ends up dead with drugs planted all over the house.

I don't care how good you are, you aren't going to win in a firefight against a SWAT team or a dozen pissed off cops once the shooting starts.

I have a very hard time believing that this would be a regular event. This story you posted happened in 1919, and in the days of modern investigation, media and the like I don't see this being a regular occurrence as your words suggest.

Thanks,
Matthew

 

[public servant]

I'm hoping he more meant that there's no way of knowing, in the midst of a firefight, if they are legitimate cops on a legitimate mission. So his conscience would be clear.

I'm hoping that's what he meant as well. But he's made past statement concerning murdering the police...so I just asked for clarification in this case.

I did edit my original post so it wasn't misleading or antagonizing.