Richards v. Wisconsin Case Brief

Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385, 117 S.Ct. 1416 (1997)

FACTS: Officers in Madison, Wisconsin obtained a search warrant to search Richards’ hotel room for drugs and other items. The officers requested a “no-knock” warrant, but the judge deleted those provisions from the warrant.

Upon arriving, an officer dressed as a maintenance man knocked on the hotel room door. Richards peered out through the crack, with the chain still on the door, then slammed it shut. (Later he stated he saw a uniformed officer behind the officer at the door.) After waiting for several seconds, the officers began kicking and ramming the door, all the while identifying themselves as police. When they broke through the door, they found Richards attempting to leave through a window, and eventually found drugs hidden in the ceiling.

Richards asked to have the evidence suppressed because the officers failed to knock and announce their presence. The state argued that he knew who was at the door, and besides, a drug warrant automatically indicates exigent circumstances since there is a high probability that the drugs might be destroyed if officers delay in entering the premises.

ISSUE: Is there a blanket exception to the “knock and announce” rule of serving warrants, when drugs are involved?

HOLDING: No

DISCUSSION: While the Court upheld the entry in this particular case, the Court refused to recognize a blanket exception for drug cases to the general knock and announce requirement. To justify a “no-knock” warrant, the officers must have a reasonable suspicion, specific to the situation, that knocking would be dangerous or futile, or would allow the destruction of evidence. Just because drugs are suspected is not enough.